[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56992922.4080500@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 18:15:14 +0100
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@...escale.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: gianfar: Delete unnecessary variable initialisations in
gfar_ethflow_to_filer_table()
>>> This is a write only variable. We can just remove it.
>>
>> Can a static source code analysis tool like the software "http://smatch.sourceforge.net/"
>> detect that such a variable is not read by this function implementation so far?
>
> No,
I imagine that there are a few tools available which can point such update candidates out.
There are various software development challenges to consider.
> but a human can.
Some software developers and source code reviewers are struggling with mentioned
implementation details as usual. Do they also wonder how the discussed variable assignment
was left over in a specific function?
> I am going to be honest, and say that I am completely ignoring most of
> your static checker patches.
I am curious if you would reconsider the affected source code places once more
when you will be notified about related issues by other tools or persons.
> You don't put enough care and consideration into them,
Would you like to explain this impression a bit more?
> and I really don't have time to waste on looking at something like that.
Thanks for your feedback.
Various open issues are competing for our attention as usual.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists