On Sun, 2015-12-20 at 20:00 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Sun, 20 Dec 2015, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 13:59 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > There is a type bug so it always returns success. > > > > How many false positives do you have to sift > > through to find this sort of error? > > The return type is thoughtfully bool, so it should be easy in this case. > The function has a return -EINVAL and a return true, so even without the > return type it would be locally apparent that there is an inconsistency.
True, -EINVAL is a non-bool constant, but bool returns can be a variable int. Dan, was the check any constant non-bool? _______________________________________________ ath9k-devel mailing list ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
