linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: wfx: sta: Fix 'else' coding style warning

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:59:38 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
Cc:     linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Srivathsa Dara <srivathsa729.8@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: wfx: sta: Fix 'else' coding style warning

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 04:33:50PM +0200, Jérôme Pouiller wrote:
> Hello Srivathsa,
> 
> Thank for your suggestion. However ...
> 
> On Tuesday 14 September 2021 16:31:06 CEST Srivathsa Dara wrote:
> > Fix 'else is not generally useful after a break or return' checkpatch
> > warning
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Srivathsa Dara <srivathsa729.8@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c | 23 +++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c b/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > index aceb18a1f54b..23c0425e3929 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > @@ -169,19 +169,18 @@ static int wfx_get_ps_timeout(struct wfx_vif *wvif, bool *enable_ps)
> >                         if (wvif->vif->bss_conf.assoc && wvif->vif->bss_conf.ps)
> >                                 dev_info(wvif->wdev->dev, "ignoring requested PS mode");
> >                         return -1;
> > -               } else {
> > -                       /* It is necessary to enable PS if channels
> > -                        * are different.
> > -                        */
> > -                       if (enable_ps)
> > -                               *enable_ps = true;
> > -                       if (wvif->wdev->force_ps_timeout > -1)
> > -                               return wvif->wdev->force_ps_timeout;
> > -                       else if (wfx_api_older_than(wvif->wdev, 3, 2))
> > -                               return 0;
> > -                       else
> > -                               return 30;
> >                 }
> > +               /* It is necessary to enable PS if channels
> > +                * are different.
> > +                */
> > +               if (enable_ps)
> > +                       *enable_ps = true;
> > +               if (wvif->wdev->force_ps_timeout > -1)
> > +                       return wvif->wdev->force_ps_timeout;
> > +               else if (wfx_api_older_than(wvif->wdev, 3, 2))
> > +                       return 0;
> > +               else
> > +                       return 30;
> 
> I am not a big fan of blindly applying the hints from checkpatch. With
> this patch, it seems that the code in the "if" branch is an exception
> and the rest of the code is the general case.
> 
> But, it is not true. There are two cases, and the author (me in fact)
> attended to express that that by using a "else" statement.

But that first part of the if statement returns, making the second part
not needed to be indented at all as the code flow just moves on here.

It's best not to indent if not needed, and it's not needed here as
the tools are saying.  So I've applied this.

thanks,

greg k-h