On 12/01/2022 23:52, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 1/13/22 08:47, Colin Ian King wrote:
A return statement is unnecessarily complicated, currently value
in variable mask is bitwise-masked and the variable is being
updated and then returned. Just updating the mask is all that is
required as the following statement is a return.
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/ata/pata_ali.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
index ab28a6707b94..1b90cda27246 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static unsigned long ali_20_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned long mask)
mask &= ~(ATA_MASK_MWDMA | ATA_MASK_UDMA);
ata_id_c_string(adev->id, model_num, ATA_ID_PROD, sizeof(model_num));
if (strstr(model_num, "WDC"))
- return mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
Yeah, not to mention that is really ugly as the return should really
have been:
return mask & ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
Yep, I did think of that as the original intention, but two return
statements one after the other was equally as ugly. It was a 50/50
choice of what was perceived as the better fix :-)
+ mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
return mask;
}
Will queue this up.
Thank you.
