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]

Message-ID: <80e9bea5-2e4e-0d8a-5123-0ed7f72916be@canonical.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Aug 2021 16:09:00 +0100
From:   Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To:     Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@...cle.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 04/08/2021 16:08, Himanshu Madhani wrote:
> 
> 
> 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)

It was an accidental double paste. My bad.

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