| Message ID | 20241219224645.749233-2-ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | lib: Remove dead code | expand |
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote: > This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: > > The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> > -- > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Why is "removing dead code" a stable kernel thing? confused, greg k-h
On Friday, December 20, 2024 08:09 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote: > > This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: > > > > The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> > > -- > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > Why is "removing dead code" a stable kernel thing? Hello Greg, It is what I understood from the process: "Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org on all stable patch candidates." [1] Does my understanding make sense? Regards, Ariel [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html > > confused, > > greg k-h
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 09:44:31AM +0100, Ariel Otilibili-Anieli wrote: > On Friday, December 20, 2024 08:09 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote: > > > This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: > > > > > > The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. > > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ > > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> > > > -- > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > Why is "removing dead code" a stable kernel thing? > > Hello Greg, > > It is what I understood from the process: > > "Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org on all stable patch candidates." [1] > > Does my understanding make sense? I'm confused, what are you expecting to happen here? Why is this even marked as a "fix"? > [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html Please read: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html for the stable kernel rules. Again, you have a "cc: stable@..." in your patch, why? thanks, greg k-h
On Friday, December 20, 2024 09:53 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 09:44:31AM +0100, Ariel Otilibili-Anieli wrote: > > On Friday, December 20, 2024 08:09 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote: > > > > This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: > > > > > > > > The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. > > > > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ > > > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > > > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> > > > > -- > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > Why is "removing dead code" a stable kernel thing? > > > > Hello Greg, > > > > It is what I understood from the process: > > > > "Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org on all stable patch candidates." [1] > > > > Does my understanding make sense? > > I'm confused, what are you expecting to happen here? Why is this even > marked as a "fix"? > > > [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html > > Please read: > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html I am, Greg; thanks for the heads up. > > for the stable kernel rules. > > Again, you have a "cc: stable@..." in your patch, why? Removed stable from the thread. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
On Friday, December 20, 2024 10:01 CET, "Ariel Otilibili-Anieli" <Ariel.Otilibili-Anieli@eurecom.fr> wrote: > On Friday, December 20, 2024 09:53 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 09:44:31AM +0100, Ariel Otilibili-Anieli wrote: > > > On Friday, December 20, 2024 08:09 CET, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote: > > > > > This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: > > > > > > > > > > The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. > > > > > > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ > > > > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > > > > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> > > > > > -- > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > > Why is "removing dead code" a stable kernel thing? > > > > > > Hello Greg, > > > > > > It is what I understood from the process: > > > > > > "Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org on all stable patch candidates." [1] > > > > > > Does my understanding make sense? > > > > I'm confused, what are you expecting to happen here? Why is this even > > marked as a "fix"? My understanding was that, for one-liners, the reference commit should be included; and CC stable. > > > > > [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html > > > > Please read: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html > > I am, Greg; thanks for the heads up. Now I got the procedure; thank you. > > > > for the stable kernel rules. > > > > Again, you have a "cc: stable@..." in your patch, why? > > Removed stable from the thread. Hello again, Greg; I should have said it upfront, for us to understand one another. I have just checked, this thread is about v2 of the patch (with stable in CC); and v1 (without) was already accepted by Andrew Morton [1]. If anything else I need to do, let me know. Have a good day, Ariel [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches/lib-remove-dead-code.patch > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h
diff --git a/lib/inflate.c b/lib/inflate.c index fbaf03c1748d..eab886baa1b4 100644 --- a/lib/inflate.c +++ b/lib/inflate.c @@ -1257,8 +1257,6 @@ static int INIT gunzip(void) /* Decompress */ if ((res = inflate())) { switch (res) { - case 0: - break; case 1: error("invalid compressed format (err=1)"); break;
This is a follow up from a discussion in Xen: The if-statement tests `res` is non-zero; meaning the case zero is never reached. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7587b503-b2ca-4476-8dc9-e9683d4ca5f0@suse.com/ Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@eurecom.fr> -- Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Cc: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@vates.tech> Cc: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com> Cc: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org> Cc: =?utf-8?q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --- lib/inflate.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)