Re: [lvc-project] [PATCH] Input: trackpoint - remove unreachable code

[Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>]

Hi Igor,

On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 03:27:14PM +0300, Igor Artemiev wrote:
> The trackpoint_sync() function always returnd 0.
> And there is no need to check its result.
> 
> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
> 
> Fixes: 2a924d71794c ("Input: trackpoint - only expose supported controls for Elan, ALPS and NXP")
> Signed-off-by: Igor Artemiev <Igor.A.Artemiev@mcst.ru>

I don't think it requires the Fixes tag... it's not really
broken.

> ---
>  drivers/input/mouse/trackpoint.c | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/input/mouse/trackpoint.c b/drivers/input/mouse/trackpoint.c
> index 4a86b3e31d3b..561a4d2d81ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/mouse/trackpoint.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/mouse/trackpoint.c
> @@ -386,9 +386,7 @@ static int trackpoint_reconnect(struct psmouse *psmouse)
>  	was_reset = tp->variant_id == TP_VARIANT_IBM &&
>  		    trackpoint_power_on_reset(&psmouse->ps2dev) == 0;
>  
> -	error = trackpoint_sync(psmouse, was_reset);
> -	if (error)
> -		return error;
> +	trackpoint_sync(psmouse, was_reset);

what worries me here is that if this returns always '0' who tells
me that it will always return '0'?

One day someone might add an error return path and you would miss
it here.

Would it make sense to make the trackpoint_sync() a void function
as well?

Andi

>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.30.2
>