[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <13330994.pIJCLN5xX1@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:25:09 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Cc: martin.petersen@...cle.com, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
James Smart <james.smart@...gotech.com>,
Dick Kennedy <dick.kennedy@...gotech.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...n.com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
Sebastian Herbszt <herbszt@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] lpfc: fix misleading indentation
On Monday 14 March 2016 16:19:58 Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > vports = lpfc_create_vport_work_array(phba);
> > - if (vports != NULL)
> > + if (vports != NULL) {
> > for (i = 0; i <= phba->max_vports && vports[i] != NULL; i++) {
> > struct Scsi_Host *shost;
> > shost = lpfc_shost_from_vport(vports[i]);
> > @@ -2877,7 +2877,8 @@ lpfc_online(struct lpfc_hba *phba)
> > }
> > spin_unlock_irq(shost->host_lock);
> > }
> > - lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array(phba, vports);
> > + }
> > + lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array(phba, vports);
> >
> > lpfc_unblock_mgmt_io(phba);
> > return 0;
> >
> Nope.
>
> vports is only valid from within the indentation block, so it should
> be moved into it.
>
>
Well, every other user of the function also looks like
vports = lpfc_create_vport_work_array(phba);
if (vports != NULL) {
do_something(vports);
}
lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array(phba, vports);
and lpfc_destroy_vport_work_array() does nothing if its argument is NULL.
I still think my patch is the correct fix for the warning.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists