From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
The variable ret is being assigned with a value that is never read,
the assignment is redundant and can be removed.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/cnic.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/cnic.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/cnic.c
index 61ab7d21f6bd..c5cca63b8571 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/cnic.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/cnic.c
@@ -1918,7 +1918,6 @@ static int cnic_bnx2x_iscsi_ofld1(struct cnic_dev *dev, struct kwqe *wqes[],
ret = cnic_alloc_bnx2x_conn_resc(dev, l5_cid);
if (ret) {
atomic_dec(&cp->iscsi_conn);
- ret = 0;
goto done;
}
ret = cnic_setup_bnx2x_ctx(dev, wqes, num);
--
2.25.1
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 3:40 PM Colin King <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>
> The variable ret is being assigned with a value that is never read,
> the assignment is redundant and can be removed.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Michael Chan <[email protected]>
On Fri, 8 May 2020 23:40:26 +0100 Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>
> The variable ret is being assigned with a value that is never read,
> the assignment is redundant and can be removed.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
Applied, thank you!
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 11:40:26PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>
> The variable ret is being assigned with a value that is never read,
> the assignment is redundant and can be removed.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
We used to return negative error codes until commit 23021c21055f ("cnic:
Improve error recovery on bnx2x devices").
To be honest, I like the deliberate "ret = 0;" because this code will
trigger a static checker warning about wrong error codes. Also it looks
wrong to human reviewers. We should probably add a comment:
/* Deliberately returning success */
return 0;
regards,
dan carpenter