Re: [PATCH] mtd: remove unneeded break

[Tom Rix]

On 10/19/20 1:04 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 9:23 PM <trix@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From: Tom Rix <trix@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c | 2 --
>>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c
>> index b40f46a43fc6..323035d4f2d0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c
>> @@ -881,7 +881,6 @@ static int mtdchar_ioctl(struct file *file, u_int cmd, u_long arg)
>>                 if (copy_from_user(&offs, argp, sizeof(loff_t)))
>>                         return -EFAULT;
>>                 return mtd_block_isbad(mtd, offs);
>> -               break;
>>         }
>>
>>         case MEMSETBADBLOCK:
>> @@ -891,7 +890,6 @@ static int mtdchar_ioctl(struct file *file, u_int cmd, u_long arg)
>>                 if (copy_from_user(&offs, argp, sizeof(loff_t)))
>>                         return -EFAULT;
>>                 return mtd_block_markbad(mtd, offs);
>> -               break;
> Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
>
> Do you want to route this patch through mtd or do you carry it?

Not sure if this question is for me.

I do not maintain a subsystem/branch, so through mtd is what i was assuming.

Tom

>