linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] staging: gdm724x: Remove unnecessary else after return

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:41:48 +0530
From:   SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimran0@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
        outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] staging: gdm724x: Remove unnecessary else after return

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:49 AM, SIMRAN SINGHAL
<singhalsimran0@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 23:44 +0530, simran singhal wrote:
>>> This patch fixes the checkpatch warning that else is not generally
>>> useful after a break or return.
>>
>>> This was done using Coccinelle:
>>> @@
>>> expression e2;
>>> statement s1;
>>> @@
>>> if(e2) { ... return ...; }
>>> -else
>>>          s1
>> []
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_endian.c b/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_endian.c
>> []
>>> @@ -26,30 +26,26 @@ __dev16 gdm_cpu_to_dev16(struct gdm_endian *ed, u16 x)
>>>  {
>>>       if (ed->dev_ed == ENDIANNESS_LITTLE)
>>>               return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_le16(x);
>>> -     else
>>> -             return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_be16(x);
>>> +     return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_be16(x);
>>
>> again, not a checkpatch message for any of the
>> suggested modified hunks.
>>
I am not getting what's the problem in removing else or may be I
am wrong you just want to say that I should change the commit message.