[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fWuavNZv-x-t=f5-suLZHAyU-1y6PFj7WYNf6O_-RW1Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:44:29 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Feng Yang <yangfeng59949@....com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com, mingo@...hat.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf kwork: Remove unreachable judgments
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:17 PM Feng Yang <yangfeng59949@....com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 08:44:45 -0700 Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 8:10 PM Feng Yang <yangfeng59949@....com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Feng Yang <yangfeng@...inos.cn>
> > >
> > > When s2[i] = '\0', if s1[i] != '\0', it will be judged by ret,
> > > and if s1[i] = '\0', it will be judegd by !s1[i].
> > > So in reality, s2 [i] will never make a judgment
> >
> > Sgtm. Out of curiosity, was this tripping a compiler warning? If so,
> > could you provide the details?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ian
>
> There was no warning during compilation,
> I just accidentally discovered it while testing and analyzing this code.
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Ian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists