linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rapidio: remove unused variable in rio

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 1 May 2021 18:40:04 +0530
From:   Anirudh Rayabharam <mail@...rudhrb.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Matt Porter <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Alexandre Bounine <alex.bou9@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mail@...rudhrb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rapidio: remove unused variable in rio_cm.c

On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 12:23:30PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 11:20:17AM +0530, Anirudh Rayabharam wrote:
> > Remove unused variable 'rc' to fix gcc warning:
> > 
> > 	drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c: In function ‘rio_txcq_handler’:
> > 	drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c:673:7: warning: variable ‘rc’ set but
> > 	not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Anirudh Rayabharam <mail@...rudhrb.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c | 3 +--
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> > index 50ec53d67a4c..545693bd86a3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> > @@ -670,12 +670,11 @@ static void rio_txcq_handler(struct cm_dev *cm, int slot)
> >  	 */
> >  	if (!list_empty(&cm->tx_reqs) && (cm->tx_cnt < RIOCM_TX_RING_SIZE)) {
> >  		struct tx_req *req, *_req;
> > -		int rc;
> >  
> >  		list_for_each_entry_safe(req, _req, &cm->tx_reqs, node) {
> >  			list_del(&req->node);
> >  			cm->tx_buf[cm->tx_slot] = req->buffer;
> > -			rc = rio_add_outb_message(cm->mport, req->rdev, cmbox,
> > +			rio_add_outb_message(cm->mport, req->rdev, cmbox,
> >  						  req->buffer, req->len);
> 
> Why not handle the potential error sent here?

I don't know how it should be handled (these functions don't return anything).
I assumed that since it is not currently being handled, it's probably not
useful.

I'll look into it though. I guess we could simply log it at the very least.

Thanks!

	- Anirudh.