[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<AS8PR02MB10217286997CFA78F802121F39C2DA@AS8PR02MB10217.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 06:09:40 +0000
From: David Binderman <dcb314@...mail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>, "namhyung@...nel.org"
<namhyung@...nel.org>, "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>, "irogers@...gle.com"
<irogers@...gle.com>, "adrian.hunter@...el.com" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"kan.liang@...ux.intel.com" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, Linux
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-6.16/tools/perf/util/tool_pmu.c:242: Pointless test ?
Hello there,
Static analyser cppcheck says:
linux-6.16/tools/perf/util/tool_pmu.c:242:15: warning: Opposite inner 'if' condition leads to a dead code block. [oppositeInnerCondition]
Source code is
for (thread = 0; thread < nthreads; thread++) {
if (thread >= nthreads)
break;
Suggest remove if test.
Regards
David Binderman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists