Messages in this thread | | | From | Stefan Brüns <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][V2] iio: adc: ina2xx: add in early -EINVAL returns in case statements | Date | Tue, 16 Oct 2018 20:26:57 +0200 |
| |
On Dienstag, 16. Oktober 2018 18:14:18 CEST Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Static analysis with CoverityScan is throwing warnings that specific > case statements are missing breaks. Rather than adding breaks, add > return -EINVAL to the specific case statements to clarify the > error return paths. Fix also saves 50 bytes. > > Before: > text data bss dec hex filename > 21418 4936 128 26482 6772 drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.o > > After: > dec hex filename > 21370 4936 128 26434 6742 drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.o > > (gcc 8.2, x86-64) > > Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1462408 ("Missing break in switch") > > --- > > V2: use returns instead of break statements to keep with the > current style used in the switch statement. > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Brüns <stefan.bruens@rwth-aachen.de>
> --- > drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c > index d1239624187d..bdd7cba6f6b0 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ina2xx-adc.c > @@ -250,6 +250,7 @@ static int ina2xx_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, > *val2 = chip->shunt_resistor_uohm; > return IIO_VAL_FRACTIONAL; > } > + return -EINVAL; > > case IIO_CHAN_INFO_HARDWAREGAIN: > switch (chan->address) { > @@ -262,6 +263,7 @@ static int ina2xx_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, > *val = chip->range_vbus == 32 ? 1 : 2; > return IIO_VAL_INT; > } > + return -EINVAL; > } > > return -EINVAL;
-- Stefan Brüns / Bergstraße 21 / 52062 Aachen home: +49 241 53809034 mobile: +49 151 50412019[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |