linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] igc: remove redundant continue statement

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]

Message-ID: <878s0g2qu6.fsf@vcostago-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:38:57 -0700
From:   Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
To:     Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] igc: remove redundant continue statement

Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com> writes:

> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> The continue statement at the end of a for-loop has no effect,
> remove it.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Continue has no effect")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ptp.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ptp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ptp.c
> index 0f021909b430..b615a980f563 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ptp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ptp.c
> @@ -860,7 +860,6 @@ static int igc_phc_get_syncdevicetime(ktime_t *device,
>  			 * so write the previous error status to clear it.
>  			 */
>  			wr32(IGC_PTM_STAT, stat);
> -			continue;

Just a bit of background.

I added the "continue" here more as documentation: we handled an error,
and we want to try again, I felt that the continue helps making that
clearer.

But I am not completely opposed about removing it.

>  		}
>  	} while (--count);
>  
> -- 
> 2.32.0
>

Cheers,
-- 
Vinicius