Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] checkpatch.pl investigation: NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF issues

[Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>]

Hi,
I am continuing this thread, but am writing about another issue
separate from author sign off. While checking checkpatch
output, I was checking the commits with the warnings:

WARNING:UNNECESSARY_ELSE: else is not generally
 useful after a break or return

Looking into the referenced section, I found some
sections with a redundant else.

For example: (revision 196273fffc1c),
arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c , line 360:

static int ssb_prctl_get(struct task_struct *task)
{
if (stf_enabled_flush_types == STF_BARRIER_NONE)
/*
* We don't have an explicit signal from firmware that we're
* vulnerable or not, we only have certain CPU revisions that
* are known to be vulnerable.
*
* We assume that if we're on another CPU, where the barrier is
* NONE, then we are not vulnerable.
*/
return PR_SPEC_NOT_AFFECTED;
else
/*
* If we do have a barrier type then we are vulnerable. The
* barrier is not a global or per-process mitigation, so the
* only value we can report here is PR_SPEC_ENABLE, which
* appears as "vulnerable" in /proc.
*/
return PR_SPEC_ENABLE;

return -EINVAL;
}

The else is pretty much redundant and the control flow
never reaches to return -EINVAL.

Is it possible to clean up all these redundant code?

Thanks,
Dwaipayan.
_______________________________________________
Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list
Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees