qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw: dead code removal


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw: dead code removal
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:05:40 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0

On 20.03.2017 19:00, Anton Volkov wrote:
> Made functions *_exit in hw/ return void instead of int (they returned 0 all 
> the time)
> and removed related return value checks
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anton Volkov <address@hidden>
> ---
>  hw/audio/hda-codec.c              | 3 +--
>  hw/audio/intel-hda.c              | 3 +--
>  hw/audio/intel-hda.h              | 2 +-
>  hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c          | 4 ++--
>  hw/char/sclpconsole.c             | 4 ++--
>  hw/core/qdev.c                    | 6 +-----
>  hw/s390x/event-facility.c         | 6 +-----
>  hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c             | 7 +++----
>  hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.h             | 2 +-
>  hw/usb/dev-smartcard-reader.c     | 3 +--
>  include/hw/qdev-core.h            | 2 +-
>  include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h | 2 +-
>  12 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/audio/hda-codec.c b/hw/audio/hda-codec.c
> index 52d4640..5402cd1 100644
> --- a/hw/audio/hda-codec.c
> +++ b/hw/audio/hda-codec.c
> @@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ static int hda_audio_init(HDACodecDevice *hda, const 
> struct desc_codec *desc)
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int hda_audio_exit(HDACodecDevice *hda)
> +static void hda_audio_exit(HDACodecDevice *hda)
>  {
>      HDAAudioState *a = HDA_AUDIO(hda);
>      HDAAudioStream *st;
> @@ -539,7 +539,6 @@ static int hda_audio_exit(HDACodecDevice *hda)
>          }
>      }
>      AUD_remove_card(&a->card);
> -    return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static int hda_audio_post_load(void *opaque, int version)
> diff --git a/hw/audio/intel-hda.c b/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
> index 537face..991c704 100644
> --- a/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
> +++ b/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static void hda_codec_dev_realize(DeviceState *qdev, Error 
> **errp)
>      }
>  }
>  
> -static int hda_codec_dev_exit(DeviceState *qdev)
> +static void hda_codec_dev_exit(DeviceState *qdev)
>  {
>      HDACodecDevice *dev = HDA_CODEC_DEVICE(qdev);
>      HDACodecDeviceClass *cdc = HDA_CODEC_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(dev);
> @@ -78,7 +78,6 @@ static int hda_codec_dev_exit(DeviceState *qdev)
>      if (cdc->exit) {
>          cdc->exit(dev);
>      }
> -    return 0;
>  }
>  
>  HDACodecDevice *hda_codec_find(HDACodecBus *bus, uint32_t cad)
> diff --git a/hw/audio/intel-hda.h b/hw/audio/intel-hda.h
> index d784bcf..53b78da 100644
> --- a/hw/audio/intel-hda.h
> +++ b/hw/audio/intel-hda.h
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ typedef struct HDACodecDeviceClass
>      DeviceClass parent_class;
>  
>      int (*init)(HDACodecDevice *dev);
> -    int (*exit)(HDACodecDevice *dev);
> +    void (*exit)(HDACodecDevice *dev);
>      void (*command)(HDACodecDevice *dev, uint32_t nid, uint32_t data);
>      void (*stream)(HDACodecDevice *dev, uint32_t stnr, bool running, bool 
> output);
>  } HDACodecDeviceClass;
> diff --git a/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c b/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> index 07d6ebd..fbe5b42 100644
> --- a/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> +++ b/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> @@ -318,9 +318,9 @@ static int console_init(SCLPEvent *event)
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> +static void console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
>  {
> -    return 0;
> +    return;
>  }
>  
>  static void console_reset(DeviceState *dev)
> diff --git a/hw/char/sclpconsole.c b/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> index b78f240..644f7cd 100644
> --- a/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> +++ b/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> @@ -246,9 +246,9 @@ static void console_reset(DeviceState *dev)
>     scon->notify = false;
>  }
>  
> -static int console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> +static void console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
>  {
> -    return 0;
> +    return;
>  }

Please avoid a "return;" at the end of a void function, that's just
superfluous.
(But in this case, as it has been mentioned by others already, I'd also
recommend to rather remove the function completely instead of having an
empty function here)

 Thomas




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]