Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-cadence: fix logically and structurally dead code | From | "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <> | Date | Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:47:09 -0500 |
| |
I got it.
I'll send v2 shortly.
Thanks for the feedback, Masahiro.
-- Gustavo
On 04/19/2018 10:42 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi. > > > 2018-04-19 22:53 GMT+09:00 Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>: >> Currently, the code block inside the for loop will never execute >> more than once, because the function returns inmediately after >> the first iteration, hence the execution of the code at the second >> iteration is structurally dead and, code at line 281: return 0; is >> never reached. >> >> Based on the code comments, it seems that the actual intention is >> to execute the code inside the for loop twice instead of once. > > Thanks for the report. > >> So, fix this issue by removing the return statement inside the for >> loop and replace the "return 0" with "return ret". >> >> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1468009 ("Logically dead code") >> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1468002 ("Structurally dead code") >> Fixes: 213fae74318b ("mmc: sdhci-cadence: send tune request twice to >> work around errata") > > > Probably, this Fixes tag will dangle. > > Ulf usually repeats git-rebase to build-up his pull-request. > > The addressed commit was already rebased, > and its commit ID will change a few more times > since it is now -rc1. > > > A clean solution would be, to squash a fix-up into the original patch. > (This patch is not what I want, though.) > > If you want to claim contribution in a separate patch, > please rewrite the code as I suggested, > and drop the Fixes tag. > > > >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c >> index bc30d16..facbad8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c >> @@ -275,10 +275,9 @@ static int sdhci_cdns_set_tune_val(struct sdhci_host *host, unsigned int val) >> !(tmp & SDHCI_CDNS_HRS06_TUNE_UP), >> 0, 1); >> >> - return ret; >> } >> >> - return 0; >> + return ret; >> } >> >> static int sdhci_cdns_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode) >> -- > > No. > I want to confirm that the operation succeeds twice. > > Your code hides any error in the first loop. > > > > My intention is like follows: > > > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cadence.c > @@ -275,10 +275,9 @@ static int sdhci_cdns_set_tune_val(struct > sdhci_host *host, unsigned int val) > !(tmp & SDHCI_CDNS_HRS06_TUNE_UP), > 0, 1); > - > - return ret; > + if (ret) > + return ret; > } > > return 0; > } > > static int sdhci_cdns_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode) > > >
| |