Re: [PATCH] i386 msr: remove unused variable

[David Rientjes <rientjes@cs.washington.edu>]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 12:27:22PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> > Remove unused variable in msr_write().
> > 
> > Reported by D Binderman <dcb314@hotmail.com>.
> > 
> > Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
> > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@cs.washington.edu>
> > ---
> >  arch/i386/kernel/msr.c |    3 +--
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/msr.c b/arch/i386/kernel/msr.c
> > index d535cdb..331bd59 100644
> > --- a/arch/i386/kernel/msr.c
> > +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/msr.c
> > @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static ssize_t msr_write(struct file *fi
> >  {
> >  	const u32 __user *tmp = (const u32 __user *)buf;
> >  	u32 data[2];
> > -	size_t rv;
> >  	u32 reg = *ppos;
> >  	int cpu = iminor(file->f_dentry->d_inode);
> >  	int err;
> > @@ -203,7 +202,7 @@ static ssize_t msr_write(struct file *fi
> >  	if (count % 8)
> >  		return -EINVAL;	/* Invalid chunk size */
> >  
> > -	for (rv = 0; count; count -= 8) {
> > +	for (; count; count -= 8) {
> >...
> 
> What about changing this to a while() loop?
> 

Unnecessary because tmp is also incremented at the bottom of this for loop 
so there are two incremental variables.  It is not better served with a 
while loop; the absence of an initialization variable does not suggest 
such.

		David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/