On 03/06/2017 03:32 PM, Dave Jiang wrote: > Make sure that xlat_status is unconditionally called.
Is this just code cleanup or is it fixing something? > > Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c | 15 +++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c > index 7361d00..9d4f461 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c > @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ int acpi_nfit_ctl(struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor *nd_desc, > struct nvdimm *nvdimm, > acpi_handle handle; > unsigned int func; > const u8 *uuid; > - int rc, i; > + int rc = 0, xlat_rc, i; > > func = cmd; > if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) { > @@ -343,21 +343,20 @@ int acpi_nfit_ctl(struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor > *nd_desc, struct nvdimm *nvdimm, > * unfilled in the output buffer > */ > rc = buf_len - offset - in_buf.buffer.length; > - if (cmd_rc) > - *cmd_rc = xlat_status(nvdimm, buf, cmd, > - fw_status); > } else { > dev_err(dev, "%s:%s underrun cmd: %s buf_len: %d > out_len: %d\n", > __func__, dimm_name, cmd_name, buf_len, > offset); > rc = -ENXIO; > + goto out; > } > - } else { > - rc = 0; > - if (cmd_rc) > - *cmd_rc = xlat_status(nvdimm, buf, cmd, fw_status); > } > > + xlat_rc = xlat_status(nvdimm, buf, cmd, fw_status); > + > + if (cmd_rc) > + *cmd_rc = xlat_rc; Is there some benefit of calling xlat_status and then throwing away the result? > + > out: > ACPI_FREE(out_obj); > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-nvdimm mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm > _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
