On 04/08/2021 16:08, Himanshu Madhani wrote:
>
>
> On 8/4/21 8:13 AM, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The variable num_cnt is being initialized with a value that is never
>> read, it is being updated later on. The assignment is redundant and
>> can be removed.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
>> index fde410989c03..2db954a7aaf1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_edif.c
>> @@ -875,7 +875,7 @@ static int
>> qla_edif_app_getfcinfo(scsi_qla_host_t *vha, struct bsg_job *bsg_job)
>> {
>> int32_t rval = 0;
>> - int32_t num_cnt = 1;
>> + int32_t num_cnt;
>> struct fc_bsg_reply *bsg_reply = bsg_job->reply;
>> struct app_pinfo_req app_req;
>> struct app_pinfo_reply *app_reply;
>>
>
> Looks Good.
>
> (I am curious if that extra "next" in patch subject was a typo or some
> workflow added that)
It was an accidental double paste. My bad.
>
> Reviewed-by: Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
