[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH-for-5.0 05/11] hw/ide/sii3112: Remove dead assignment

From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-5.0 05/11] hw/ide/sii3112: Remove dead assignment
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 15:26:21 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0

On 3/21/20 3:14 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 3/21/20 2:39 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:

On Saturday, March 21, 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:

    Fix warning reported by Clang static code analyzer:

         CC      hw/ide/sii3112.o
       hw/ide/sii3112.c:204:9: warning: Value stored to 'val' is never read
               val = 0;
               ^     ~

    Reported-by: Clang Static Analyzer
    Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden
      hw/ide/sii3112.c | 2 +-
      1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

    diff --git a/hw/ide/sii3112.c b/hw/ide/sii3112.c
    index 06605d7af2..36f1905ddb 100644
    --- a/hw/ide/sii3112.c
    +++ b/hw/ide/sii3112.c
    @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ static uint64_t sii3112_reg_read(void *opaque,
    hwaddr addr,
              val = (uint32_t)d->regs[1].sien << 16;
    -        val = 0;
    +        break;

There is another function in the same file, having a similar switch statement. There is no warning for that second tunction, since "val" is its parameter, not a local varioble, like is the case here. This means that the proposed change introduces inconsistency between two functions, therefore it is better to remove the initialization of "val" to 0, than to remove this line in "default" section.

No clue why there is no warnings emitted for sii3112_reg_write()...

Do you mind sending a patch?

Don't worry I'll follow up.


          trace_sii3112_read(size, addr, val);
          return val;
    --     2.21.1

reply via email to

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