[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ALSA: cs4281: remove redundant assignment to variable val and remove a goto
From: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
The variable val is being assigned with a value that is never read and it is being updated later with a new value. The assignment is redundant and can be removed. Also remove a goto statement and a label and replace with a break statement.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com --- sound/pci/cs4281.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/pci/cs4281.c b/sound/pci/cs4281.c index a2cce3ecda6f..04c712647853 100644 --- a/sound/pci/cs4281.c +++ b/sound/pci/cs4281.c @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ static int snd_cs4281_trigger(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, int cmd)
static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) { - unsigned int val = ~0; + unsigned int val; if (real_rate) *real_rate = rate; @@ -707,9 +707,8 @@ static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) case 44100: return 1; case 48000: return 0; default: - goto __variable; + break; } - __variable: val = 1536000 / rate; if (real_rate) *real_rate = 1536000 / val;
On Fri, 05 Jul 2019 11:57:04 +0200, Colin King wrote:
From: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
The variable val is being assigned with a value that is never read and it is being updated later with a new value. The assignment is redundant and can be removed. Also remove a goto statement and a label and replace with a break statement.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
Applied, thanks.
Takashi
Am 05.07.2019 11:57, schrieb Colin King:
From: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
The variable val is being assigned with a value that is never read and it is being updated later with a new value. The assignment is redundant and can be removed. Also remove a goto statement and a label and replace with a break statement.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
sound/pci/cs4281.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/pci/cs4281.c b/sound/pci/cs4281.c index a2cce3ecda6f..04c712647853 100644 --- a/sound/pci/cs4281.c +++ b/sound/pci/cs4281.c @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ static int snd_cs4281_trigger(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, int cmd)
static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) {
- unsigned int val = ~0;
unsigned int val;
if (real_rate) *real_rate = rate;
@@ -707,9 +707,8 @@ static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) case 44100: return 1; case 48000: return 0; default:
goto __variable;
break;
__variable:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this is confusing. is *real_rate = rate intended here ? (like above)
val could be eliminated by using
return 1536000 / rate ;
re, wh
On Fri, 05 Jul 2019 12:20:10 +0200, walter harms wrote:
Am 05.07.2019 11:57, schrieb Colin King:
From: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
The variable val is being assigned with a value that is never read and it is being updated later with a new value. The assignment is redundant and can be removed. Also remove a goto statement and a label and replace with a break statement.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com
sound/pci/cs4281.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/pci/cs4281.c b/sound/pci/cs4281.c index a2cce3ecda6f..04c712647853 100644 --- a/sound/pci/cs4281.c +++ b/sound/pci/cs4281.c @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ static int snd_cs4281_trigger(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, int cmd)
static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) {
- unsigned int val = ~0;
unsigned int val;
if (real_rate) *real_rate = rate;
@@ -707,9 +707,8 @@ static unsigned int snd_cs4281_rate(unsigned int rate, unsigned int *real_rate) case 44100: return 1; case 48000: return 0; default:
goto __variable;
break;
__variable:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^this is confusing. is *real_rate = rate intended here ? (like above)
val could be eliminated by using
return 1536000 / rate ;
No, the current code is correct. The purpose of this calculation is to consider the truncation by division.
Takashi
participants (3)
-
Colin King -
Takashi Iwai -
walter harms