[<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