The warning was because of the following line in function
liquidio_set_fec():
retval = wait_for_sc_completion_timeout(oct, sc, 0);
if (retval)
return (-EIO);
If this statement is not true, retval must be 0 and not updated
later. So, It is better to return 0 directly.
Signed-off-by: YANG LI <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Abaci <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
index 37d0641..6e2426f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_core.c
@@ -1747,7 +1747,7 @@ int liquidio_set_fec(struct lio *lio, int on_off)
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec ? "on" : "off");
}
- return retval;
+ return 0;
}
int liquidio_get_fec(struct lio *lio)
--
1.8.3.1
On Wed, 2020-12-30 at 14:07 +0800, YANG LI wrote:
> The warning was because of the following line in function
> liquidio_set_fec():
>
> retval = wait_for_sc_completion_timeout(oct, sc, 0);
> ????if (retval)
> return (-EIO);
I presume abaci is a robot
Perhaps also the robot could look for code immediately above this like:
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec = var;
if (resp->fec_setting == SEAPI_CMD_FEC_SET_RS)
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec = 1;
else
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec = 0;
where a location is immediately overwritten.
so the line
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec = var;
could be highlighted and perhaps removed
and also perhaps the second test and set block could be written
oct->props[lio->ifidx].fec = resp->fec_setting == SEAPI_CMD_FEC_SET_RS;
From: YANG LI <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 14:07:30 +0800
> The warning was because of the following line in function
> liquidio_set_fec():
>
> retval = wait_for_sc_completion_timeout(oct, sc, 0);
> if (retval)
> return (-EIO);
>
> If this statement is not true, retval must be 0 and not updated
> later. So, It is better to return 0 directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: YANG LI <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Abaci <[email protected]>
Maybe you can remove the rest of the 'retval' usage in this function
and even the variable itself?
Thanks.