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  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]
Date:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 09:47:54 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:     Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] rapidio: Remove set but not used variable 'rc'

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:18:44PM +0800, Zheng Yongjun wrote:
> Fixes gcc '-Wunused-but-set-variable' warning:
> 
> drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c: In function rio_txcq_handler:
> drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c:673:7: warning: variable ‘rc’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> 
> rc is never used, so remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> index 50ec53d67a4c..545693bd86a3 100644
> --- a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> +++ b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> @@ -670,12 +670,11 @@ static void rio_txcq_handler(struct cm_dev *cm, int slot)
>  	 */
>  	if (!list_empty(&cm->tx_reqs) && (cm->tx_cnt < RIOCM_TX_RING_SIZE)) {
>  		struct tx_req *req, *_req;
> -		int rc;
>  
>  		list_for_each_entry_safe(req, _req, &cm->tx_reqs, node) {
>  			list_del(&req->node);
>  			cm->tx_buf[cm->tx_slot] = req->buffer;
> -			rc = rio_add_outb_message(cm->mport, req->rdev, cmbox,
> +			rio_add_outb_message(cm->mport, req->rdev, cmbox,
>  						  req->buffer, req->len);

That's not the only place in this file where this call is made, and the
return value is ignored.

It should be fixed up to properly check that return value, not ignore
it.  Can you do that instead for the places this is called?

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists