On 03/06/2019 18:21, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:02:47 +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
>>
>> The variable err is assigned with the value -EINVAL that is never
>> read and it is re-assigned a new value later on. The assignment is
>> redundant and can be removed.
>>
>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/bpf/devmap.c | 2 +-
>> kernel/bpf/xskmap.c | 2 +-
>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/devmap.c b/kernel/bpf/devmap.c
>> index 5ae7cce5ef16..a76cc6412fc4 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/devmap.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/devmap.c
>> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static u64 dev_map_bitmap_size(const union bpf_attr *attr)
>> static struct bpf_map *dev_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>> {
>> struct bpf_dtab *dtab;
>> - int err = -EINVAL;
>> + int err;
>> u64 cost;
>
> Perhaps keep the variables ordered longest to shortest?
Is that a required coding standard?
>
>> if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/xskmap.c b/kernel/bpf/xskmap.c
>> index 22066c28ba61..26859c6c9491 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/xskmap.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/xskmap.c
>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ struct xsk_map {
>>
>> static struct bpf_map *xsk_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>> {
>> - int cpu, err = -EINVAL;
>> + int cpu, err;
>> struct xsk_map *m;
>> u64 cost;
>
> And here.
>
