netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: ns83820: drop pointless static qualifier in ns83820_probe

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:15:26 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     maowenan <maowenan@...wei.com>
cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, hawk@...nel.org,
        jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ns83820: drop pointless static qualifier in
 ns83820_probe_phy()



On Tue, 19 Feb 2019, maowenan wrote:

>
>
> On 2019/2/19 16:01, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019, Mao Wenan wrote:
> >
> >> There is no need to have the 'int first' static
> >> since new value always be assigned before use it.
> >> The old codes of first dereferencing this variable have
> >> been commented out. So it is useless with 'static int first'.
> >> /*
> >> if (!first) {
> >>  ...
> >> }
> >> */
> >> first = 1;
> >
> > Do you need the variable at all?
> >
> > In the code, the commenting out is actually done with #if 0.  It could be
> > good for the commit log to reflect the code more accurately.
> >
> OK, the original codes are using #if 0 to comment out, but when I generate patch
> the "#if 0" has been removed, so I use "/*...*/" to reflect that.

I don't understand the above comment.  The proposed patch doesn't have any
impact on the #if 0 lines.

>
> > Can the #if 0 and code be removed?  Apparently it predates git.
> >
> > A commented out printk below also predates git.
> >
> I think all the "#if 0" comment out codes and printk codes can be removed, shall I send
> v2 to do this?

It seems reasonable to me.

julia

> > julia
> >
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mao Wenan <maowenan@...wei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/ns83820.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/ns83820.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/ns83820.c
> >> index 958fced4dacf..fb064df3a1a6 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/ns83820.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/ns83820.c
> >> @@ -1869,7 +1869,7 @@ static unsigned ns83820_mii_write_reg(struct ns83820 *dev, unsigned phy, unsigne
> >>  static void ns83820_probe_phy(struct net_device *ndev)
> >>  {
> >>  	struct ns83820 *dev = PRIV(ndev);
> >> -	static int first;
> >> +	int first;
> >>  	int i;
> >>  #define MII_PHYIDR1	0x02
> >>  #define MII_PHYIDR2	0x03
> >> --
> >> 2.20.1
> >>
> >>
> >
> > .
> >
>
>