>-----Original Message----- >From: Peter Maydell [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 9:47 PM >To: Chenqun (kuhn) <[email protected]> >Cc: QEMU Developers <[email protected]>; QEMU Trivial <qemu- >[email protected]>; Fam Zheng <[email protected]>; Hannes Reinecke ><[email protected]>; Zhanghailiang <[email protected]>; >Qemu-block <[email protected]>; Euler Robot ><[email protected]>; Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [PATCH] hw/scsi/megasas:Clean up some redundant code fix >Clang warnings > >On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 13:10, Chen Qun <[email protected]> >wrote: >> >> Here are some redundant statements, we can clean them up. >> Clang static code analyzer show warning: >> hw/scsi/megasas.c:1175:32: warning: Value stored to 'max_ld_disks' during >its initialization is never read >> uint32_t num_ld_disks = 0, max_ld_disks = s->fw_luns; >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ >> hw/scsi/megasas.c:1183:9: warning: Value stored to 'max_ld_disks' is never >read >> max_ld_disks = 0; >> ^ ~ >> >> Reported-by: Euler Robot <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <[email protected]> >> --- >> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> >> Cc: Fam Zheng <[email protected]> >> Cc: Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> --- >> hw/scsi/megasas.c | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/scsi/megasas.c b/hw/scsi/megasas.c index >> af18c88b65..3f982e1d3b 100644 >> --- a/hw/scsi/megasas.c >> +++ b/hw/scsi/megasas.c >> @@ -1172,7 +1172,7 @@ static int >megasas_dcmd_ld_list_query(MegasasState *s, MegasasCmd *cmd) >> uint16_t flags; >> struct mfi_ld_targetid_list info; >> size_t dcmd_size = sizeof(info), resid; >> - uint32_t num_ld_disks = 0, max_ld_disks = s->fw_luns; >> + uint32_t num_ld_disks = 0, max_ld_disks; >> BusChild *kid; >> >> /* mbox0 contains flags */ >> @@ -1180,7 +1180,6 @@ static int >megasas_dcmd_ld_list_query(MegasasState *s, MegasasCmd *cmd) >> trace_megasas_dcmd_ld_list_query(cmd->index, flags); >> if (flags != MR_LD_QUERY_TYPE_ALL && >> flags != MR_LD_QUERY_TYPE_EXPOSED_TO_HOST) { >> - max_ld_disks = 0; >> } > >This doesn't look right -- your change removes the only statement in the body >of this "if". I think you need to examine what the function is trying to do >with >the test it is doing on these flags in order to identify what the right change >is... > Ah, sorry for trouble, it is not a mistake that should happen. I should double check it next time.
>Probably this means going back to the h/w spec to identify the correct >behaviour overall. > Yes, I should go back the hw spec in order to understand the behaviour overall. Thanks. Chen Qun
