linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] powerpc/cell: Code cleanup for spufs_mfc

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]

Message-ID: <13890cb8-c454-49d6-af55-c274fa2ef025@kylinos.cn>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 09:58:37 +0800
From: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
 "jk@...abs.org" <jk@...abs.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
 "mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
 "npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
 "aneesh.kumar@...nel.org" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>,
 "naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/cell: Code cleanup for spufs_mfc_flush

On 2024/1/25 18:41, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 25/01/2024 à 11:08, Kunwu Chan a écrit :
>> This part was commented from commit a33a7d7309d7
>> ("[PATCH] spufs: implement mfc access for PPE-side DMA")
>> in about 18 years before.
>>
>> If there are no plans to enable this part code in the future,
>> we can remove this dead code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>
>> ---
>>    arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/file.c | 12 ------------
>>    1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/file.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/file.c
>> index 02a8158c469d..d5e1af483601 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/file.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/file.c
>> @@ -1705,19 +1705,7 @@ static int spufs_mfc_flush(struct file *file, fl_owner_t id)
>>    	ret = spu_acquire(ctx);
>>    	if (ret)
>>    		goto out;
>> -#if 0
>> -/* this currently hangs */
>> -	ret = spufs_wait(ctx->mfc_wq,
>> -			 ctx->ops->set_mfc_query(ctx, ctx->tagwait, 2));
>> -	if (ret)
>> -		goto out;
>> -	ret = spufs_wait(ctx->mfc_wq,
>> -			 ctx->ops->read_mfc_tagstatus(ctx) == ctx->tagwait);
>> -	if (ret)
>> -		goto out;
>> -#else
>>    	ret = 0;
> 
Thanks for your reply.
> If you arrived here, it means ret is already 0, otherwise you would have
> jumped to label out:, so you can also remove that ret = 0 setting.
> 
I'm patronizing the removal of useless code, it's my bad.
> And while you are at it, there is no point in a goto to just a return,
> just return instead of the goto, and then you can return 0 directly,
> something like:
> 
> 	ret = spu_acquire(ctx);
> 	if (ret)
> 		return ret;
> 
> 	spu_release(ctx);
> 
> 	return 0;
> 
> 
> That would be a better cleanup.
Thanks for your suggestions,i'll update in v2 and add a 'Suggested-by:'.
> 
>> -#endif
>>    	spu_release(ctx);
>>    out:
>>    	return ret;
-- 
Thanks,
   Kunwu