linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Directly return instead of using local 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: <20220328080817.4r5n5z375hzqaxjf@viti.kaiser.cx>
Date:   Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:08:17 +0200
From:   Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
To:     Haowen Bai <baihaowen@...zu.com>
Cc:     Larry.Finger@...inger.net, phil@...lpotter.co.uk,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, straube.linux@...il.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Directly return instead of using local
 ret variable

Thus wrote Haowen Bai (baihaowen@...zu.com):

> From: 白浩文 <baihaowen@...zu.com>

> fixes coccinelle warning:
> ./drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c:1518:14-17: Unneeded variable: "ret".
>  Return "_FAIL" on line 1549
> ./drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c:357:5-8: Unneeded variable: "res".
>  Return "_SUCCESS" on line 380

These are two unrelated changes. I guess you should split this into two
patches.

> Signed-off-by: 白浩文 <baihaowen@...zu.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> index 10d5f12..4b7b0ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> @@ -354,7 +354,6 @@ static u8 init_channel_set(struct adapter *padapter, u8 ChannelPlan, struct rt_c

>  int	init_mlme_ext_priv(struct adapter *padapter)
>  {
> -	int	res = _SUCCESS;
>  	struct registry_priv *pregistrypriv = &padapter->registrypriv;
>  	struct mlme_ext_priv *pmlmeext = &padapter->mlmeextpriv;
>  	struct mlme_priv *pmlmepriv = &padapter->mlmepriv;
> @@ -377,7 +376,7 @@ int	init_mlme_ext_priv(struct adapter *padapter)

>  	pmlmeext->active_keep_alive_check = true;

> -	return res;
> +	return _SUCCESS;
>  }

The caller does not check the return value. You should change the
function to void init_mlme_ext_priv...

>  void free_mlme_ext_priv(struct mlme_ext_priv *pmlmeext)
> @@ -1515,7 +1514,6 @@ unsigned int OnAtim(struct adapter *padapter, struct recv_frame *precv_frame)

>  unsigned int on_action_spct(struct adapter *padapter, struct recv_frame *precv_frame)
>  {
> -	unsigned int ret = _FAIL;
>  	struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
>  	struct sta_priv *pstapriv = &padapter->stapriv;
>  	u8 *pframe = precv_frame->rx_data;
> @@ -1546,7 +1544,7 @@ unsigned int on_action_spct(struct adapter *padapter, struct recv_frame *precv_f
>  	}

>  exit:
> -	return ret;
> +	return _FAIL;
>  }
>  unsigned int OnAction_qos(struct adapter *padapter, struct recv_frame *precv_frame)
> -- 
> 2.7.4