On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 08:16:16AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 02/10/2024 16:10, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 02:50:43PM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > > The variable ret is being assigned a value that is never read, the
> > > following break statement exits the loop where ret is being re-assigned
> > > a new value. Remove the redundant assignment.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King<colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c | 4 +---
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> > > index d95f417e24c0..7c60f5acc4a3 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> > > @@ -3686,14 +3686,12 @@ static int do_device_access(struct sdeb_store_info *sip, struct scsi_cmnd *scp,
> > > sdeb_data_sector_lock(sip, do_write);
> > > ret = sg_copy_buffer(sdb->table.sgl, sdb->table.nents,
> > You would think there would be a:
> >
> > total += ret;
> >
> > here.
> >
> > > fsp + (block * sdebug_sector_size),
> > > sdebug_sector_size, sg_skip, do_write);T
> > > sdeb_data_sector_unlock(sip, do_write);
> > > - if (ret != sdebug_sector_size) {
> > > - ret += (i * sdebug_sector_size);
> > > + if (ret != sdebug_sector_size)
> > > break;
> > > - }
> > > sg_skip += sdebug_sector_size;
> > > if (++block >= sdebug_store_sectors)
> > > block = 0;
> > > }
> > > ret = num * sdebug_sector_size;
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > And that this would be a "return total;"
>
> Right, the function is currently a little messy as there is no variable for
> "total", and we re-assign ret per loop.
>
> So I think that we can either:
> a. introduce a variable to hold "total"
> b. this change:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> index af5e3a7f47a9..39218ffc6a31 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> @@ -3690,13 +3690,14 @@ static int do_device_access(struct
> sdeb_store_info *sip, struct scsi_cmnd *scp,
> sdeb_data_sector_unlock(sip, do_write);
> if (ret != sdebug_sector_size) {
> ret += (i * sdebug_sector_size);
> - break;
> + goto out_unlock;
> }
> sg_skip += sdebug_sector_size;
> if (++block >= sdebug_store_sectors)
> block = 0;
> }
> ret = num * sdebug_sector_size;
> +out_unlock:
> sdeb_data_unlock(sip, atomic);
>
>
> Maybe a. is better, as b. is maintaining some messiness.
>
I'm happy with option a.
regards,
dan carpenter
