lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH linux-next] USB: serial: ftdi_sio: remove the unneeded result variable
    On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 01:38:27PM +0000, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
    > From: Xu Panda <xu.panda@zte.com.cn>
    >
    > Return the value usb_control_msg() directly instead of storing
    > it in another redundant variable.
    >
    > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@zte.com.cn>
    > Signed-off-by: Xu Panda <xu.panda@zte.com.cn>
    > ---
    > drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c | 14 ++++++--------
    > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
    > index 0a1da579ead5..f02dcef69cb9 100644
    > --- a/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
    > +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
    > @@ -1394,7 +1394,6 @@ static int change_speed(struct tty_struct *tty, struct usb_serial_port *port)
    > u16 value;
    > u16 index;
    > u32 index_value;
    > - int rv;
    >
    > index_value = get_ftdi_divisor(tty, port);
    > value = (u16)index_value;
    > @@ -1407,13 +1406,12 @@ static int change_speed(struct tty_struct *tty, struct usb_serial_port *port)
    > index = (u16)((index << 8) | priv->interface);
    > }
    >
    > - rv = usb_control_msg(port->serial->dev,
    > - usb_sndctrlpipe(port->serial->dev, 0),
    > - FTDI_SIO_SET_BAUDRATE_REQUEST,
    > - FTDI_SIO_SET_BAUDRATE_REQUEST_TYPE,
    > - value, index,
    > - NULL, 0, WDR_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
    > - return rv;
    > + return usb_control_msg(port->serial->dev,
    > + usb_sndctrlpipe(port->serial->dev, 0),
    > + FTDI_SIO_SET_BAUDRATE_REQUEST,
    > + FTDI_SIO_SET_BAUDRATE_REQUEST_TYPE,
    > + value, index,
    > + NULL, 0, WDR_SHORT_TIMEOUT);
    > }

    That's really not the correct use of the return value of
    usb_control_msg(). Can you fix this up to properly handle the return
    value, or better yet, use the usb_control_msg_send() call?

    thanks,

    greg k-h

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-09-12 16:05    [W:3.059 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site