> Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 13:36:29 -0500
> From: Michael McConville <[email protected]>
> 
> The continue statement below is a nop. It seems that it meant to
> continue the outer loop. This is an educated guess based on the logic
> and the inner loop's comments. Thoughts?

Looks like this is a bug indeed.

> Also, in situations like this, should we make all continue statements
> goto loop_end? In the fix I committed for pciide(4) a few weeks ago, we
> only changed the offending continue.

Always best to keep things consistent.

ok kettenis@


> Index: sys/dev/mii/mii.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/mii/mii.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.21
> diff -u -p -r1.21 mii.c
> --- sys/dev/mii/mii.c 20 Apr 2010 20:42:16 -0000      1.21
> +++ sys/dev/mii/mii.c 27 Dec 2015 18:30:36 -0000
> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ mii_attach(struct device *parent, struct
>                                * configured at this address.
>                                */
>                               offset++;
> -                             continue;
> +                             goto loop_end;
>                       }
>               }
>  
> @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ mii_attach(struct device *parent, struct
>                       mii->mii_instance++;
>               }
>               offset++;
> +
> +             loop_end: ;
>       }
>  }
>  
> 
> 

Reply via email to