[PATCH net-next] rxrpc: remove redundant variables 'xcall','sp' and 'did_discard'

[PATCH net-next] rxrpc: remove redundant variables 'xcall','sp' and 'did_discard'

[YueHaibing]

Variables 'xcall','sp' and 'did_discard' are being assigned,
but are never used,hence they are redundant and can be removed.

fix fllowing warning:

net/rxrpc/call_accept.c:110:22: warning: variable ‘xcall’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
net/rxrpc/call_event.c:165:25: warning: variable ‘sp’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
net/rxrpc/conn_client.c:1054:7: warning: variable ‘did_discard’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]

Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
---
 net/rxrpc/call_accept.c | 2 --
 net/rxrpc/call_event.c  | 2 --
 net/rxrpc/conn_client.c | 2 --
 3 files changed, 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/rxrpc/call_accept.c b/net/rxrpc/call_accept.c
index a9a9be5..7487a62 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/call_accept.c
+++ b/net/rxrpc/call_accept.c
@@ -107,7 +107,6 @@ static int rxrpc_service_prealloc_one(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
 
 	write_lock(&rx->call_lock);
 	if (user_attach_call) {
-		struct rxrpc_call *xcall;
 		struct rb_node *parent, **pp;
 
 		/* Check the user ID isn't already in use */
@@ -115,7 +114,6 @@ static int rxrpc_service_prealloc_one(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
 		parent = NULL;
 		while (*pp) {
 			parent = *pp;
-			xcall = rb_entry(parent, struct rxrpc_call, sock_node);
 			if (user_call_ID < call->user_call_ID)
 				pp = &(*pp)->rb_left;
 			else if (user_call_ID > call->user_call_ID)
diff --git a/net/rxrpc/call_event.c b/net/rxrpc/call_event.c
index 2021041..8e7434e 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/call_event.c
+++ b/net/rxrpc/call_event.c
@@ -162,7 +162,6 @@ static void rxrpc_congestion_timeout(struct rxrpc_call *call)
  */
 static void rxrpc_resend(struct rxrpc_call *call, unsigned long now_j)
 {
-	struct rxrpc_skb_priv *sp;
 	struct sk_buff *skb;
 	unsigned long resend_at;
 	rxrpc_seq_t cursor, seq, top;
@@ -207,7 +206,6 @@ static void rxrpc_resend(struct rxrpc_call *call, unsigned long now_j)
 
 		skb = call->rxtx_buffer[ix];
 		rxrpc_see_skb(skb, rxrpc_skb_tx_seen);
-		sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
 
 		if (anno_type == RXRPC_TX_ANNO_UNACK) {
 			if (ktime_after(skb->tstamp, max_age)) {
diff --git a/net/rxrpc/conn_client.c b/net/rxrpc/conn_client.c
index 5736f64..e4bfbd7 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/conn_client.c
+++ b/net/rxrpc/conn_client.c
@@ -1051,7 +1051,6 @@ void rxrpc_discard_expired_client_conns(struct work_struct *work)
 		container_of(work, struct rxrpc_net, client_conn_reaper);
 	unsigned long expiry, conn_expires_at, now;
 	unsigned int nr_conns;
-	bool did_discard = false;
 
 	_enter("");
 
@@ -1113,7 +1112,6 @@ void rxrpc_discard_expired_client_conns(struct work_struct *work)
 	 * If someone re-sets the flag and re-gets the ref, that's fine.
 	 */
 	rxrpc_put_connection(conn);
-	did_discard = true;
 	nr_conns--;
 	goto next;
 
-- 
2.7.0

Re: [PATCH net-next] rxrpc: remove redundant variables 'xcall','sp' and 'did_discard'

[David Howells]

YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> wrote:

>  		while (*pp) {
>  			parent = *pp;
> -			xcall = rb_entry(parent, struct rxrpc_call, sock_node);
>  			if (user_call_ID < call->user_call_ID)
>  				pp = &(*pp)->rb_left;
>  			else if (user_call_ID > call->user_call_ID)

No, this is an actual bug.  The if-conditions should be using xcall-> not
call->.

> -		sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);

Yeah, that's fine.

> -	did_discard = true;

Hmmm...  It looks like I intended something with this, but I don't remember
what now.  I think it can be removed.

David

Re: [PATCH net-next] rxrpc: remove redundant variables 'xcall','sp' and 'did_discard'

[YueHaibing]

On 2018/8/1 16:28, David Howells wrote:
> YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
>>  		while (*pp) {
>>  			parent = *pp;
>> -			xcall = rb_entry(parent, struct rxrpc_call, sock_node);
>>  			if (user_call_ID < call->user_call_ID)
>>  				pp = &(*pp)->rb_left;
>>  			else if (user_call_ID > call->user_call_ID)
> 
> No, this is an actual bug.  The if-conditions should be using xcall-> not
> call->.

yes, I will post a new patch, thanks.

> 
>> -		sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
> 
> Yeah, that's fine.
> 
>> -	did_discard = true;
> 
> Hmmm...  It looks like I intended something with this, but I don't remember
> what now.  I think it can be removed.
> 
> David
> 
> .
>