| Message ID | 20200302130715.29440-6-kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | redundant code: Fix warnings reported by Clang static code analyzer | expand |
Le 02/03/2020 à 14:07, Chen Qun a écrit : > Clang static code analyzer show warning: > hw/scsi/esp-pci.c:198:9: warning: Value stored to 'size' is never read > size = 4; > ^ ~ > > Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> > --- > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > Cc:Fam Zheng <fam@euphon.net> > --- > hw/scsi/esp-pci.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c > index d5a1f9e017..2e6cc07d4e 100644 > --- a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c > +++ b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c > @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static void esp_pci_io_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > val <<= shift; > val |= current & ~(mask << shift); > addr &= ~3; > - size = 4; > } perhaps a "g_assert(size >= 4)" instead would be cleaner to mute the warning? I think it's a good point to update the size if in the future the code below is modified to use size. Thanks, Laurent
>-----Original Message----- >From: Laurent Vivier [mailto:laurent@vivier.eu] >Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 8:22 PM >To: Chenqun (kuhn) <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com>; qemu- >devel@nongnu.org; qemu-trivial@nongnu.org >Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org; Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com>; >Zhanghailiang <zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com>; Paolo Bonzini ><pbonzini@redhat.com> >Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] scsi/esp-pci: Remove redundant statement in >esp_pci_io_write() > >Le 02/03/2020 à 14:07, Chen Qun a écrit : >> Clang static code analyzer show warning: >> hw/scsi/esp-pci.c:198:9: warning: Value stored to 'size' is never read >> size = 4; >> ^ ~ >> >> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> >> --- >> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc:Fam Zheng ><fam@euphon.net> >> --- >> hw/scsi/esp-pci.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c index >> d5a1f9e017..2e6cc07d4e 100644 >> --- a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c >> +++ b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c >> @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static void esp_pci_io_write(void *opaque, hwaddr >addr, >> val <<= shift; >> val |= current & ~(mask << shift); >> addr &= ~3; >> - size = 4; >> } > >perhaps a "g_assert(size >= 4)" instead would be cleaner to mute the warning? > Yes, add 'g_assert(size >= 4)' can mute the warning. > >I think it's a good point to update the size if in the future the code below is >modified to use size. > Hmm, maybe it is true. So, let's keep ' size = 4' and add 'g_assert(size >= 4)' after if() statement , shall we? Thanks, Chen Qun > >Thanks, >Laurent >
Le 10/03/2020 à 12:52, Chenqun (kuhn) a écrit : >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Laurent Vivier [mailto:laurent@vivier.eu] >> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 8:22 PM >> To: Chenqun (kuhn) <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com>; qemu- >> devel@nongnu.org; qemu-trivial@nongnu.org >> Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org; Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com>; >> Zhanghailiang <zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com>; Paolo Bonzini >> <pbonzini@redhat.com> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] scsi/esp-pci: Remove redundant statement in >> esp_pci_io_write() >> >> Le 02/03/2020 à 14:07, Chen Qun a écrit : >>> Clang static code analyzer show warning: >>> hw/scsi/esp-pci.c:198:9: warning: Value stored to 'size' is never read >>> size = 4; >>> ^ ~ >>> >>> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> >>> --- >>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc:Fam Zheng >> <fam@euphon.net> >>> --- >>> hw/scsi/esp-pci.c | 1 - >>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c index >>> d5a1f9e017..2e6cc07d4e 100644 >>> --- a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c >>> +++ b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c >>> @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static void esp_pci_io_write(void *opaque, hwaddr >> addr, >>> val <<= shift; >>> val |= current & ~(mask << shift); >>> addr &= ~3; >>> - size = 4; >>> } >> >> perhaps a "g_assert(size >= 4)" instead would be cleaner to mute the warning? >> > Yes, add 'g_assert(size >= 4)' can mute the warning. > >> >> I think it's a good point to update the size if in the future the code below is >> modified to use size. >> > Hmm, maybe it is true. > > So, let's keep ' size = 4' and add 'g_assert(size >= 4)' after if() statement , shall we? Yes, it's what I would prefer. But it's a question of taste... Paolo? Fam? Thanks, Laurent
diff --git a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c index d5a1f9e017..2e6cc07d4e 100644 --- a/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c +++ b/hw/scsi/esp-pci.c @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static void esp_pci_io_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, val <<= shift; val |= current & ~(mask << shift); addr &= ~3; - size = 4; } if (addr < 0x40) {
Clang static code analyzer show warning: hw/scsi/esp-pci.c:198:9: warning: Value stored to 'size' is never read size = 4; ^ ~ Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.robot@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Chen Qun <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com> --- Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc:Fam Zheng <fam@euphon.net> --- hw/scsi/esp-pci.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)