Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] hw/block/onenand: Remove dead code block

2017-10-04 Thread Kevin Wolf 
Am 03.10.2017 um 12:25 hat Laurent Vivier geschrieben:
> On 03/10/2017 11:57, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > The condition of the for-loop makes sure that b is always smaller
> > than s->blocks, so the "if (b >= s->blocks)" statement is completely
> > superfluous here.
> > 
> > Buglink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1715007
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth 
> > ---
> >  hw/block/onenand.c | 4 
> >  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/hw/block/onenand.c b/hw/block/onenand.c
> > index 30e40f3..de65c9e 100644
> > --- a/hw/block/onenand.c
> > +++ b/hw/block/onenand.c
> > @@ -520,10 +520,6 @@ static void onenand_command(OneNANDState *s)
> >  s->intstatus |= ONEN_INT;
> >  
> >  for (b = 0; b < s->blocks; b ++) {
> > -if (b >= s->blocks) {
> > -s->status |= ONEN_ERR_CMD;
> > -break;
> > -}
> >  if (s->blockwp[b] == ONEN_LOCK_LOCKTIGHTEN)
> >  break;
> >  
> > 
> 
> Looks like a bad cut'n'paste from case 0x23.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier 

Thanks, applied to the block branch.

Kevin

Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] hw/block/onenand: Remove dead code block

2017-10-03 Thread Laurent Vivier 
On 03/10/2017 11:57, Thomas Huth wrote:
> The condition of the for-loop makes sure that b is always smaller
> than s->blocks, so the "if (b >= s->blocks)" statement is completely
> superfluous here.
> 
> Buglink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1715007
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth 
> ---
>  hw/block/onenand.c | 4 
>  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/block/onenand.c b/hw/block/onenand.c
> index 30e40f3..de65c9e 100644
> --- a/hw/block/onenand.c
> +++ b/hw/block/onenand.c
> @@ -520,10 +520,6 @@ static void onenand_command(OneNANDState *s)
>  s->intstatus |= ONEN_INT;
>  
>  for (b = 0; b < s->blocks; b ++) {
> -if (b >= s->blocks) {
> -s->status |= ONEN_ERR_CMD;
> -break;
> -}
>  if (s->blockwp[b] == ONEN_LOCK_LOCKTIGHTEN)
>  break;
>  
> 

Looks like a bad cut'n'paste from case 0x23.

Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier