On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 01:34:52PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2023/03/20 13:21, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 07:03:00PM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2023 18:50:51 +0100 > >> > >> The label “fail” was used to jump to another pointer check despite of > >> the detail in the implementation of the function “iforce_usb_probe” > >> that it was determined already that a corresponding variable contained > >> still a null pointer. > >> > >> 1. Use more appropriate labels instead. > >> > >> 2. Reorder jump targets at the end. > >> > >> 3. Delete a redundant check. > >> > >> > >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > > > I am sorry, but I do not understand what the actual issue is. The fact > > that come Coccinelle script complains is not enough to change the code. > > > > Right. There is no issue with the code, for usb_free_urb(NULL) is a no-op. > Proposing as a cleanup, without Fixes: tags, could be possible though. Yes, that would be acceptable. Thanks. -- Dmitry
