Declaring char *last_failed_step; is reasonable because you can later
assign the function's return value to last_failed_step without
explicitly assigning an initial value.
Signed-off-by: ZhouJie <[email protected]>
---
kernel/power/main.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/power/main.c b/kernel/power/main.c
index f6425ae3e8b05..24c675f6ab862 100644
--- a/kernel/power/main.c
+++ b/kernel/power/main.c
@@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ static ssize_t last_failed_step_show(struct kobject *kobj,
{
int index;
enum suspend_stat_step step;
- char *last_failed_step = NULL;
+ char *last_failed_step;
index = suspend_stats.last_failed_step + REC_FAILED_NUM - 1;
index %= REC_FAILED_NUM;
--
2.18.2
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 10:38 AM ZhouJie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Declaring char *last_failed_step; is reasonable because you can later
> assign the function's return value to last_failed_step without
> explicitly assigning an initial value.
Did you want to say something like "it is not necessary to initialize
last_failed_step to NULL, because it is never read before being
assigned a value" ?
Also, to my eyes, last_failed_step is redundant and can be dropped
from that function entirely.
> Signed-off-by: ZhouJie <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/power/main.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/power/main.c b/kernel/power/main.c
> index f6425ae3e8b05..24c675f6ab862 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/main.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/main.c
> @@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ static ssize_t last_failed_step_show(struct kobject *kobj,
> {
> int index;
> enum suspend_stat_step step;
> - char *last_failed_step = NULL;
> + char *last_failed_step;
>
> index = suspend_stats.last_failed_step + REC_FAILED_NUM - 1;
> index %= REC_FAILED_NUM;
> --
> 2.18.2
>