On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:18:46PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 09:54:22PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > On the topic of "one thing per patch", so we are aiming to do one
> > thing per patch so it is easier to locate bugs if they get introduced
> > but also, and more i
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 09:54:22PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On the topic of "one thing per patch", so we are aiming to do one
> thing per patch so it is easier to locate bugs if they get introduced
> but also, and more importantly, to make review easier. So from this
> patch am I right in t
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:23:14PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 09:54:06AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > @@ -2196,20 +2195,21 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_pmksa(struct net_device *dev,
> > case IW_PMKSA_REMOVE:
> > if (list_empty(&priv->pmklist.head)) { /
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 09:54:06AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> @@ -2196,20 +2195,21 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_pmksa(struct net_device *dev,
> case IW_PMKSA_REMOVE:
> if (list_empty(&priv->pmklist.head)) { /* list empty */
> return -EINVAL;
> -
Checkpatch emits WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break
or return. Two warnings of this type are emitted, both are the result
of a else statement after a return statement. The 'else' can safely be
removed.
Remove unnecessary else statement.
Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding
---
drive
