linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] char: applicom: Remove redundant ret variable in ac

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: <2024100923-scorecard-anemic-34fa@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:47:34 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@...s.chinamobile.com>
Cc: arnd@...db.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] char: applicom: Remove redundant ret variable in ac_read
 function

On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 11:32:19PM -0700, Zhu Jun wrote:
> Removed the unused variable 'ret' from the ac_read function
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@...s.chinamobile.com>
> ---
>  drivers/char/applicom.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/char/applicom.c b/drivers/char/applicom.c
> index 9fed9706d9cd..17ff89b15f56 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/applicom.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/applicom.c
> @@ -539,7 +539,6 @@ static ssize_t ac_read (struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	unsigned int i;
>  	unsigned char tmp;
> -	int ret = 0;
>  	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
>  #ifdef DEBUG
>  	int loopcount=0;
> @@ -570,7 +569,7 @@ static ssize_t ac_read (struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_
>  
>  				/* Got a packet for us */
>  				memset(&st_loc, 0, sizeof(st_loc));
> -				ret = do_ac_read(i, buf, &st_loc, &mailbox);
> +				do_ac_read(i, buf, &st_loc, &mailbox);
>  				spin_unlock_irqrestore(&apbs[i].mutex, flags);
>  				set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
>  				remove_wait_queue(&FlagSleepRec, &wait);
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 

Is there some reason you are ignoring our emails?  I already responded
to this patch when you sent it yesterday, why did you send it again
today with only the subject line changed a tiny bit?

I think you need to work with someone else first to get some more
experience with kernel development before sending out any more changes,
as this is not an acceptable way to work with our community, sorry.

greg k-h