Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <859112e91c3d221dc599e381dbaecb90dd6467a1.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless: remove unneeded break
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@gmail.com>, trix@redhat.com,
        kvalo@codeaurora.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org,
        mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com,
        ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com, johannes.berg@intel.com,
        emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com, luciano.coelho@intel.com,
        linuxwifi@intel.com, chunkeey@googlemail.com, pkshih@realtek.com,
        sara.sharon@intel.com, tova.mussai@intel.com,
        nathan.errera@intel.com, lior2.cohen@intel.com, john@phrozen.org,
        shaul.triebitz@intel.com, shahar.s.matityahu@intel.com,
        Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, zhengbin13@huawei.com,
        christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr, yanaijie@huawei.com,
        saurav.girepunje@gmail.com
Cc:     ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2020 08:21:10 -0700
In-Reply-To: <b31478ea-979a-1c9c-65db-32325233a715@gmail.com>
References: <20201019150507.20574-1-trix@redhat.com>
         <b31478ea-979a-1c9c-65db-32325233a715@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.4-0ubuntu1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > 
> > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > index 5bd35c147e19..3ca9d26df174 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
> >   			} else {
> >   				goto good_eeprom;
> >   			}
> > -			break;
> Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
> >   		default:
> >   			break;
> >   		}

No, though the code would be clearer like:
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
index 5bd35c147e19..233fa072d96d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
@@ -867,10 +867,8 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
 					 "test!\n");
 				err = -ENOMSG;
 				goto err;
-			} else {
-				goto good_eeprom;
 			}
-			break;
+			goto good_eeprom;
 		default:
 			break;
 		}