wireless: remove unneeded break

From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>

A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto

Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c             | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/testmode.c           | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c                  | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/mac-ctxt.c    | 2 --
 drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c           | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8188ee/hw.c  | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8723ae/hw.c  | 1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c | 3 ---
 8 files changed, 11 deletions(-)

On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> 
> A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>

> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> index 5bd35c147e19..3ca9d26df174 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
>   			} else {
>   				goto good_eeprom;
>   			}
> -			break;
Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
>   		default:
>   			break;
>   		}

Cheers,
Christian

On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > 
> > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > index 5bd35c147e19..3ca9d26df174 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> > @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
> >   			} else {
> >   				goto good_eeprom;
> >   			}
> > -			break;
> Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
> >   		default:
> >   			break;
> >   		}

No, though the code would be clearer like:
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
index 5bd35c147e19..233fa072d96d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
@@ -867,10 +867,8 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
 					 "test!\n");
 				err = -ENOMSG;
 				goto err;
-			} else {
-				goto good_eeprom;
 			}
-			break;
+			goto good_eeprom;
 		default:
 			break;
 		}

On 10/19/20 9:20 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 10:54 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> On 10/19/20 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>>>> On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> []
>>>>> @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
>>>>>   			} else {
>>>>>   				goto good_eeprom;
>>>>>   			}
>>>>> -			break;
>>>> Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
>> Clang would definitely complain about this.
> As far as I can tell, clang 10.0.0 doesn't complain.
>
> This compiles without fallthrough complaint
>
> from make V=1 W=123 CC=clang drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.o
> with -Wimplicit-fallthrough added
>
> $ clang -Wp,-MMD,drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/.eeprom.o.d  -nostdinc -isystem /usr/local/lib/clang/10.0.0/include -I./arch/x86/include -I./arch/x86/include/generated  -I./include -I./arch/x86/include/uapi -I./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I./include/uapi -I./include/generated/uapi -include ./include/linux/kconfig.h -include ./include/linux/compiler_types.h -D__KERNEL__ -Qunused-arguments -DKBUILD_EXTRA_WARN1 -DKBUILD_EXTRA_WARN2 -DKBUILD_EXTRA_WARN3 -Wall -Wundef -Werror=strict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fshort-wchar -fno-PIE -Werror=implicit-function-declaration -Werror=implicit-int -Wno-format-security -std=gnu89 -no-integrated-as -Werror=unknown-warning-option -mno-sse -mno-mmx -mno-sse2 -mno-3dnow -mno-avx -m64 -mno-80387 -mstack-alignment=8 -mtune=generic -mno-red-zone -mcmodel=kernel -DCONFIG_X86_X32_ABI -Wno-sign-compare -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -mretpoline-external-thunk -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -Wno-address-of-packed-member -O2 -Wframe-larger-than=2048 -fstack-protector-strong -Wno-format-invalid-specifier -Wno-gnu -mno-global-merge -Wno-unused-const-variable -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern -pg -mfentry -DCC_USING_FENTRY -falign-functions=32 -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wvla -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-array-bounds -fno-strict-overflow -fno-stack-check -Werror=date-time -Werror=incompatible-pointer-types -fcf-protection=none -Wextra -Wunused -Wno-unused-parameter -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-include-dirs -Wunused-const-variable -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-type-limits -Wcast-align -Wdisabled-optimization -Wnested-externs -Wshadow -Wmissing-field-initializers -Wtype-limits -Wunused-macros -Wbad-function-cast -Wcast-qual -Wconversion -Wpacked -Wpadded -Wpointer-arith -Wredundant-decls -Wsign-compare -Wswitch-default     -fsanitize=kernel-address -mllvm -asan-mapping-offset=0xdffffc0000000000  -mllvm -asan-globals=1  -mllvm -asan-instrumentation-with-call-threshold=0  -mllvm -asan-stack=0   --param asan-instrument-allocas=1   -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc -fsanitize-coverage=trace-cmp -Wimplicit-fallthrough    -DKBUILD_MODFILE='"drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54common"' -DKBUILD_BASENAME='"eeprom"' -DKBUILD_MODNAME='"p54common"' -c -o drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.o drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
>
I did not intend for if-else; break; changes to be in the patchset.

I will kick this out and respin the patch after i get the first pass of the other changes out.

Sorry,

Tom

On 10/19/20 11:20, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 10:54 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> On 10/19/20 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>>>> On 19/10/2020 17:05, trix@redhat.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> []
>>>>> @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ int p54_parse_eeprom(struct ieee80211_hw *dev, void *eeprom, int len)
>>>>>   			} else {
>>>>>   				goto good_eeprom;
>>>>>   			}
>>>>> -			break;
>>>> Won't the compiler (gcc) now complain about a missing fallthrough annotation?
>>
>> Clang would definitely complain about this.
> 
> As far as I can tell, clang 10.0.0 doesn't complain.

Oh, yeah. I didn't see the other "goto err;" in the if clause above. Clang doesn't
complain because there is actually no chance of any implicit fall-through.

--
Gustavo