linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: remove redundant assignment to pointer eb

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:   Sun, 13 Dec 2020 23:22:35 +0100
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: remove redundant assignment to pointer eb

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:59 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote on Fri, 11 Sep 2020
> 11:23:21 +0100:
>
> > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> >
> > Pointer eb is being assigned a value that is never read, the assignment
> > is redundant and can be removed.
> >
> > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mtd/mtdswap.c | 1 -
> >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdswap.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdswap.c
> > index 58eefa43af14..795dec4483c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdswap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdswap.c
> > @@ -1053,7 +1053,6 @@ static int mtdswap_writesect(struct mtd_blktrans_dev *dev,
> >       if (ret < 0)
> >               return ret;
> >
> > -     eb = d->eb_data + (newblock / d->pages_per_eblk);
> >       d->page_data[page] = newblock;
> >
> >       return 0;
>
> Yes it looks unused but perhaps it helps to catch the logic here. This
> is not a strong disagreement but I'd keep it this way. Let's see what
> other maintainers think.

This looks like dead code, let's rip it out.

-- 
Thanks,
//richard