[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw: dead code removal
From: |
Cornelia Huck |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw: dead code removal |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:48:32 +0100 |
On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:05:40 +0100
Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 20.03.2017 19:00, Anton Volkov wrote:
> > Made functions *_exit in hw/ return void instead of int (they returned 0
> > all the time)
> > and removed related return value checks
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Volkov <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > hw/audio/hda-codec.c | 3 +--
> > hw/audio/intel-hda.c | 3 +--
> > hw/audio/intel-hda.h | 2 +-
> > hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c | 4 ++--
> > hw/char/sclpconsole.c | 4 ++--
> > hw/core/qdev.c | 6 +-----
> > hw/s390x/event-facility.c | 6 +-----
> > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c | 7 +++----
> > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.h | 2 +-
> > hw/usb/dev-smartcard-reader.c | 3 +--
> > include/hw/qdev-core.h | 2 +-
> > include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h | 2 +-
> > 12 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > diff --git a/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c b/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> > index 07d6ebd..fbe5b42 100644
> > --- a/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> > +++ b/hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c
> > @@ -318,9 +318,9 @@ static int console_init(SCLPEvent *event)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static int console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> > +static void console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> > {
> > - return 0;
> > + return;
> > }
> >
> > static void console_reset(DeviceState *dev)
> > diff --git a/hw/char/sclpconsole.c b/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> > index b78f240..644f7cd 100644
> > --- a/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> > +++ b/hw/char/sclpconsole.c
> > @@ -246,9 +246,9 @@ static void console_reset(DeviceState *dev)
> > scon->notify = false;
> > }
> >
> > -static int console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> > +static void console_exit(SCLPEvent *event)
> > {
> > - return 0;
> > + return;
> > }
>
> Please avoid a "return;" at the end of a void function, that's just
> superfluous.
> (But in this case, as it has been mentioned by others already, I'd also
> recommend to rather remove the function completely instead of having an
> empty function here)
Yes, let's remove them.