On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:25:59AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> 
> The err_exit label in acpi_aml_init() is not used any more after
> commit 9ec6dbfbdc0a ("ACPI: no need to check return value of
> debugfs_create functions"), but the other label in there is not
> necessary too, so rearrange the code to get rid of them both.
> 
> No intentional functional impact.
> 
> Fixes: 9ec6dbfbdc0a ("ACPI: no need to check return value of debugfs_create 
> functions")
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_dbg.c |   15 +++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/acpi_dbg.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/acpi_dbg.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/acpi_dbg.c
> @@ -750,29 +750,28 @@ static const struct acpi_debugger_ops ac
>  
>  int __init acpi_aml_init(void)
>  {
> -     int ret = 0;
> +     int ret;
>  
>       /* Initialize AML IO interface */
>       mutex_init(&acpi_aml_io.lock);
>       init_waitqueue_head(&acpi_aml_io.wait);
>       acpi_aml_io.out_crc.buf = acpi_aml_io.out_buf;
>       acpi_aml_io.in_crc.buf = acpi_aml_io.in_buf;
> +
>       acpi_aml_dentry = debugfs_create_file("acpidbg",
>                                             S_IFREG | S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
>                                             acpi_debugfs_dir, NULL,
>                                             &acpi_aml_operations);
> -     ret = acpi_register_debugger(THIS_MODULE, &acpi_aml_debugger);
> -     if (ret)
> -             goto err_fs;
> -     acpi_aml_initialized = true;
>  
> -err_fs:
> +     ret = acpi_register_debugger(THIS_MODULE, &acpi_aml_debugger);
>       if (ret) {
>               debugfs_remove(acpi_aml_dentry);
>               acpi_aml_dentry = NULL;
> +             return ret;
>       }
> -err_exit:
> -     return ret;
> +
> +     acpi_aml_initialized = true;
> +     return 0;
>  }
>  

Odd that 0-day never reported this :(

Sorry about it, and thanks for the patch:

Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

Reply via email to