On 02.03.2022 21:49:27, Vincent MAILHOL wrote: > > I think it's possible to assign rx_event_msg before the > > es58x_check_msg_len(). > > Yes, I will do so. Even if this is a false positive, this pattern > can be misleading. e.g. during a code review, this does indeed > look incorrect at first glance. > > Also, doing such change would be consistent with was is done in > other functions: > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/net/can/usb/etas_es58x/es58x_fd.c#L210 > > This not being a bug fix, is it fine to send it to net-next? ACK > Or do you see a need to backport this? Don't think so. > > I think (hope?) the compiler will not optimize > > anything away. :) > > With a function call and a return statement, the compiler would > need to be severely defective to try to optimize this away :) I was thinking of this: | void *foo = bar->baz; | | if (!bar) | return; | | printf("%p", foo); There were/are compilers that optimize the bar NULL pointer check away, because bar has already been de-referenced. Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
