On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 03:49:41PM +0200, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> This patch fixes two 'Dead assignment' warnings, where the one in
> count_common_prefix_run() is actually a bug where the set is in reverse order.
Hi Eelco,
I agree with the correctness of these changes, and that they
address clang-tidy warnings. But if one is a bug should it be in a
separate patch, with a fixes tag, and description of the
problem that is being addressed?
> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com>
> ---
> lib/ofp-monitor.c | 5 ++---
> lib/ofp-table.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/ofp-monitor.c b/lib/ofp-monitor.c
> index c27733a52..aed5f0497 100644
> --- a/lib/ofp-monitor.c
> +++ b/lib/ofp-monitor.c
> @@ -962,13 +962,12 @@ ofputil_decode_flow_update(struct ofputil_flow_update
> *update,
> return 0;
> } else if (update->event == OFPFME_PAUSED
> || update->event == OFPFME_RESUMED) {
> - struct ofp_flow_update_paused *ofup;
>
> - if (length != sizeof *ofup) {
> + if (length != sizeof(struct ofp_flow_update_paused)) {
> goto bad_len;
> }
>
> - ofup = ofpbuf_pull(msg, sizeof *ofup);
> + ofpbuf_pull(msg, sizeof(struct ofp_flow_update_paused));
> return 0;
> } else if (update->event == OFPFME_INITIAL
> || update->event == OFPFME_ADDED
> diff --git a/lib/ofp-table.c b/lib/ofp-table.c
> index a956754f2..f9bd3b7f9 100644
> --- a/lib/ofp-table.c
> +++ b/lib/ofp-table.c
> @@ -1416,7 +1416,7 @@ count_common_prefix_run(const char *ids[], size_t n,
> if (!next) {
> break;
> } else if (next < extra_prefix_len) {
> - next = extra_prefix_len;
> + extra_prefix_len = next;
> }
> i++;
> }
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> d...@openvswitch.org
> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
