linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] cxl/region: Remove else after return 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: <15913bee637e2cff63626dc64c0577abc1ad9c6c.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Sun, 30 Jul 2023 13:09:26 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Raghu Halharvi <raghuhack78@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, ira.weiny@...el.com,
        bwidawsk@...nel.org, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        vishal.l.verma@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] cxl/region: Remove else after return statement

On Sat, 2023-07-29 at 19:18 -0700, Alison Schofield wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 07:34:21AM +0000, Raghu Halharvi wrote:
> > Issue found with checkpatch
> > 
> > The else section here is redundant after return statement, removing it.
> > Sanity and correctness is not affected due to this fix.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Raghu Halharvi <raghuhack78@...il.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>
> 
> 
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/cxl/core/region.c | 8 ++++----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > index e115ba382e04..bfd3b13dd2c1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > @@ -133,11 +133,11 @@ static int cxl_region_invalidate_memregion(struct cxl_region *cxlr)
> >  				&cxlr->dev,
> >  				"Bypassing cpu_cache_invalidate_memregion() for testing!\n");
> >  			return 0;
> > -		} else {
> > -			dev_err(&cxlr->dev,
> > -				"Failed to synchronize CPU cache state\n");
> > -			return -ENXIO;
> >  		}
> > +
> > +		dev_err(&cxlr->dev,
> > +			"Failed to synchronize CPU cache state\n");
> > +		return -ENXIO;
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	cpu_cache_invalidate_memregion(IORES_DESC_CXL);
> > -- 
> > 2.39.2
> > 

My preference would be for this function to be something like:
---
static int cxl_region_invalidate_memregion(struct cxl_region *cxlr)
{
	if (cpu_cache_has_invalidate_memregion()) {
		cpu_cache_invalidate_memregion(IORES_DESC_CXL);
		return 0;
	}

	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CXL_REGION_INVALIDATION_TEST)) {
		dev_warn_once(&cxlr->dev,
			      "Bypassing cpu_cache_invalidate_memregion() for testing!\n");
		return 0;
	}

	dev_err(&cxlr->dev, "Failed to synchronize CPU cache state\n");
	return -ENXIO;
}