[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YF3qxema68+hLEZq@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:08:05 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Xu Jia <xujia39@...wei.com>
Cc: ross.schm.dev@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, hulkcommits@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] staging: rtl8723bs: core: fix error return
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 04:30:41PM +0800, Xu Jia wrote:
> Function rtw_init_bcmc_stainfo() is always return success.
> Variable 'ret' set but not used.
>
> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Xu Jia <xujia39@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> index f96dd0b40e04..7b578192adf5 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> @@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ u32 rtw_init_bcmc_stainfo(struct adapter *padapter)
> psta->mac_id = 1;
>
> exit:
> - return _SUCCESS;
> + return res;
> }
You just changed the logic of this function, now it can return a
failure. Is that ok? have you tested it when this fails?
Given that I do not think anyone actually tests this value, should this
function just return void instead?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists