[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0Sej06iAj_F==o3sGfNNT4d98=+0MFQCi539wO+WB9oQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 14:27:57 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] char: applicom: Remove 3 unused variables 'ret' and
2 instances of 'byte_reset_it'
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:13 PM Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> @@ -568,7 +565,7 @@ static ssize_t ac_read (struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_
>
> /* Got a packet for us */
> memset(&st_loc, 0, sizeof(st_loc));
> - ret = do_ac_read(i, buf, &st_loc, &mailbox);
> + do_ac_read(i, buf, &st_loc, &mailbox);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&apbs[i].mutex, flags);
> set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> remove_wait_queue(&FlagSleepRec, &wait);
This change doesn't look right to me. It's clear that the code we have is bogus,
but I think what the authors intended was:
--- a/drivers/char/applicom.c
+++ b/drivers/char/applicom.c
@@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static ssize_t ac_read (struct file *filp, char
__user *buf, size_t count, loff_
return -EFAULT;
if (copy_to_user(buf + sizeof(st_loc),
&mailbox, sizeof(mailbox)))
return -EFAULT;
- return tmp;
+ return ret;
}
if (tmp > 2) {
>From the git history, I can see that this got changed in linux-2.3.99,
but the previous
version just returned zero on success instead of the number of bytes,
so presumably
nobody ever cared about the returned value.
> @@ -700,7 +697,6 @@ static long ac_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> void __iomem *pmem;
> int ret = 0;
> static int warncount = 10;
> - volatile unsigned char byte_reset_it;
> struct st_ram_io *adgl;
> void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
>
> @@ -762,7 +758,7 @@ static long ac_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>
> for (i = 0; i < MAX_BOARD; i++) {
> if (apbs[i].RamIO) {
> - byte_reset_it = readb(apbs[i].RamIO + RAM_IT_TO_PC);
> + readb(apbs[i].RamIO + RAM_IT_TO_PC);
> }
This is a little subtle but should be fine on all architectures now. I suspect
this used to be required a long time ago before the readb() function worked
correctly everywhere.
I'm also reminded that I had meant to send a patch to move this file
to drivers/staging,
as all evidence suggests it has not been used for decades.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists