AW: [PATCH][next] SFH: fix error return check for -ERESTARTSYS

From: Walter Harms
Date: Fri Oct 30 2020 - 10:40:21 EST


nit picking:
i would without "else" to improve readability:

if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS)
return -ERESTARTSYS;

if (ret < 0)
return -ETIMEDOUT;

return 0;

jm2c
wh
________________________________________
Von: Colin King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Oktober 2020 15:30:02
An: Nehal Shah; Sandeep Singh; Jiri Kosina; Benjamin Tissoires; linux-input@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [PATCH][next] SFH: fix error return check for -ERESTARTSYS

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Currently the check for the error return code -ERESTARTSYS is dead code
and never executed because a previous check for ret < 0 is catching this
and returning -ETIMEDOUT instead. Fix this by checking for -ERESTARTSYS
before the more generic negative error code.

Addresses-Coverity: ("Logically dead code")
Fixes: 4b2c53d93a4b ("SFH:Transport Driver to add support of AMD Sensor Fusion Hub (SFH)")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_hid.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_hid.c b/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_hid.c
index a471079a3bd0..4f989483aa03 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_hid.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_hid.c
@@ -88,10 +88,10 @@ static int amdtp_wait_for_response(struct hid_device *hid)
ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(hid_data->hid_wait,
cli_data->request_done[i],
msecs_to_jiffies(AMD_SFH_RESPONSE_TIMEOUT));
- if (ret < 0)
- return -ETIMEDOUT;
- else if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS)
+ if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS)
return -ERESTARTSYS;
+ else if (ret < 0)
+ return -ETIMEDOUT;
else
return 0;
}
--
2.27.0