Fix incorrect variable assignment.
Based on line 1511: aq_ret = I40_ERR_PARAM; the correct variable to be
used in this instance is aq_ret instead of ret. Also, variable ret is
updated at line 1602 just before return, so assigning a value to this
variable in this code block is useless.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1397693
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.c
index 6bee254..fb1f018 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.c
@@ -1567,7 +1567,7 @@ static int i40e_vc_get_vf_resources_msg(struct i40e_vf *vf, u8 *msg)
dev_err(&pf->pdev->dev,
"VF %d requested polling mode: this feature is supported only when the device is running in single function per port (SFP) mode\n",
vf->vf_id);
- ret = I40E_ERR_PARAM;
+ aq_ret = I40E_ERR_PARAM;
goto err;
}
vfres->vf_offload_flags |= VIRTCHNL_VF_OFFLOAD_RX_POLLING;
--
2.5.0
On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 21:38:26 -0500
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Fix incorrect variable assignment.
> Based on line 1511: aq_ret = I40_ERR_PARAM; the correct variable to be
> used in this instance is aq_ret instead of ret. Also, variable ret is
> updated at line 1602 just before return, so assigning a value to this
> variable in this code block is useless.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1397693
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
Thanks for the fix, looks reasonable.
Acked-by: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>
Hi Jesse,
Quoting Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 21:38:26 -0500
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Fix incorrect variable assignment.
>> Based on line 1511: aq_ret = I40_ERR_PARAM; the correct variable to be
>> used in this instance is aq_ret instead of ret. Also, variable ret is
>> updated at line 1602 just before return, so assigning a value to this
>> variable in this code block is useless.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1397693
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks for the fix, looks reasonable.
> Acked-by: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>
Absolutely, glad to help.
Regards
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva