linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/android: remove redundant ret variable

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: <YdQzNX77nT2OIh7W@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Jan 2022 12:44:53 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     cgel.zte@...il.com
Cc:     arve@...roid.com, tkjos@...roid.com, maco@...roid.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, christian@...uner.io, hridya@...gle.com,
        surenb@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>,
        Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/android: remove redundant ret variable

On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 11:35:00AM +0000, cgel.zte@...il.com wrote:
> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>
> 
> Return value from list_lru_count() directly instead
> of taking this in another redundant variable.
> 
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>
> Signed-off-by: CGEL ZTE <cgel.zte@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/android/binder_alloc.c | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/android/binder_alloc.c b/drivers/android/binder_alloc.c
> index 340515f54498..4f221d1839f4 100644
> --- a/drivers/android/binder_alloc.c
> +++ b/drivers/android/binder_alloc.c
> @@ -1049,18 +1049,14 @@ enum lru_status binder_alloc_free_page(struct list_head *item,
>  static unsigned long
>  binder_shrink_count(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
>  {
> -	unsigned long ret = list_lru_count(&binder_alloc_lru);
> -	return ret;
> +	return list_lru_count(&binder_alloc_lru);
>  }
>  
>  static unsigned long
>  binder_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
>  {
> -	unsigned long ret;
> -
> -	ret = list_lru_walk(&binder_alloc_lru, binder_alloc_free_page,
> +	return list_lru_walk(&binder_alloc_lru, binder_alloc_free_page,
>  			    NULL, sc->nr_to_scan);
> -	return ret;

Is the compiler output any different?

If not, why make this change?

What did you use to test this change is equivalent?

thanks,

greg k-h