linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH] staging: rtl8188eu: Fix else after return WARNING (checkpatch)

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:   Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:57:55 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Sohom Datta <sohom.datta@...rner.manipal.edu>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] staging: rtl8188eu: Fix else after return WARNING
 (checkpatch)

On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 12:19:50PM +0530, Sohom Datta wrote:
> >From 4c8c8f3ff7f4d711daea4ac3bb987fcecc7ef1ed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Sohom <sohom.datta@...rner.manipal.edu>
> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 18:04:56 +0530
> Subject: [RESEND PATCH] staging: rtl8188eu: Fix else after return WARNING
>  (checkpatch)
> 
> Fixed:
> WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break or return
> 1636: FILE: ./rtw_recv.c:1636:
> +           return false;
> +       else
> 
> Separated the return statement into a separate block since
> it doesn't seem to depend on the SN_LESS explicity being false.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sohom <sohom.datta@...rner.manipal.edu>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_recv.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_recv.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_recv.c
> index 5fe7a0458dd2..5e81134ffb6d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_recv.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_recv.c
> @@ -1629,10 +1629,11 @@ static int enqueue_reorder_recvframe(struct recv_reorder_ctrl *preorder_ctrl,
>  		hdr = list_entry(plist, struct recv_frame, list);
>  		pnextattrib = &hdr->attrib;
>  
> +		if (SN_EQUAL(pnextattrib->seq_num, pattrib->seq_num))
> +			return false;
> +
>  		if (SN_LESS(pnextattrib->seq_num, pattrib->seq_num))
>  			plist = plist->next;
> -		else if (SN_EQUAL(pnextattrib->seq_num, pattrib->seq_num))
> -			return false;
>  		else
>  			break;
>  	}

Checkpatch is just wrong here.  Ignore it when it's wrong.

regards,
dan carpenter