[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <471C1FC9.1070705@mvista.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:58:01 -0500
From: Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc: openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] ipmi_demangle_device_id(): remove dead code
Yes, it's a problem, but wrong fix. Thanks, I'll send a patch for it.
-corey
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This patch removes obviously dead code spotted by the Coverity checker.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
>
> ---
>
> include/linux/ipmi_smi.h | 10 ++--------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6/include/linux/ipmi_smi.h.old 2007-10-21 23:03:03.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/ipmi_smi.h 2007-10-21 23:05:59.000000000 +0200
> @@ -158,44 +158,38 @@ static inline int ipmi_demangle_device_i
> if (data_len < 9)
> return -EINVAL;
> if (data[0] != IPMI_NETFN_APP_RESPONSE << 2 ||
> data[1] != IPMI_GET_DEVICE_ID_CMD)
> /* Strange, didn't get the response we expected. */
> return -EINVAL;
> if (data[2] != 0)
> /* That's odd, it shouldn't be able to fail. */
> return -EINVAL;
>
> data += 3;
> data_len -= 3;
> id->device_id = data[0];
> id->device_revision = data[1];
> id->firmware_revision_1 = data[2];
> id->firmware_revision_2 = data[3];
> id->ipmi_version = data[4];
> id->additional_device_support = data[5];
> - if (data_len >= 6) {
> - id->manufacturer_id = (data[6] | (data[7] << 8) |
> - (data[8] << 16));
> - id->product_id = data[9] | (data[10] << 8);
> - } else {
> - id->manufacturer_id = 0;
> - id->product_id = 0;
> - }
> + id->manufacturer_id = (data[6] | (data[7] << 8) | (data[8] << 16));
> + id->product_id = data[9] | (data[10] << 8);
> if (data_len >= 15) {
> memcpy(id->aux_firmware_revision, data+11, 4);
> id->aux_firmware_revision_set = 1;
> } else
> id->aux_firmware_revision_set = 0;
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> /* Add a low-level interface to the IPMI driver. Note that if the
> interface doesn't know its slave address, it should pass in zero.
> The low-level interface should not deliver any messages to the
> upper layer until the start_processing() function in the handlers
> is called, and the lower layer must get the interface from that
> call. */
> int ipmi_register_smi(struct ipmi_smi_handlers *handlers,
> void *send_info,
> struct ipmi_device_id *device_id,
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists