linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next[next]] scsi: qla2xxx: Remove redundant initialization of variable num

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:   Wed, 4 Aug 2021 10:08:04 -0500
From:   Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@...cle.com>
To:     Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Nilesh Javali <njavali@...vell.com>,
        GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream@...vell.com,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next[next]] scsi: qla2xxx: Remove redundant
 initialization of variable num_cnt



On 8/4/21 8:13 AM, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> 
> The variable num_cnt is being initialized with a value that is never
> read, it is being updated later on. The assignment is redundant and
> can be removed.
> 
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
> index fde410989c03..2db954a7aaf1 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
> @@ -875,7 +875,7 @@ static int
>   qla_edif_app_getfcinfo(scsi_qla_host_t *vha, struct bsg_job *bsg_job)
>   {
>   	int32_t			rval = 0;
> -	int32_t			num_cnt = 1;
> +	int32_t			num_cnt;
>   	struct fc_bsg_reply	*bsg_reply = bsg_job->reply;
>   	struct app_pinfo_req	app_req;
>   	struct app_pinfo_reply	*app_reply;
> 

Looks Good.

(I am curious if that extra "next" in patch subject was a typo or some 
workflow added that)

Reviewed-by: Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@...cle.com>

-- 
Himanshu Madhani                                Oracle Linux Engineering