Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 May 2014 21:10:21 +0100 | From | Giedrius Rekasius <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/uncore: Remove unnecessary assignment to "box" in uncore_pci_remove(...) |
| |
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:16:04PM +0200, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 28.05.2014 11:11, schrieb Giedrius Rekasius: > > Local variable "box" gets assigned correct value when it is initialized. > > There is no need to assign the same value again. > > > > Signed-off-by: Giedrius Rekasius <giedrius.rekasius@gmail.com> > > --- > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c > > index 65bbbea..8cbbb1b 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c > > @@ -3817,7 +3817,6 @@ static void uncore_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu; > > int i, cpu, phys_id = pcibus_to_physid[pdev->bus->number]; > > > > - box = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); > > if (!box) { > > for (i = 0; i < UNCORE_EXTRA_PCI_DEV_MAX; i++) { > > if (extra_pci_dev[phys_id][i] == pdev) { > > Just a remark, > for readability it is better to remove the other one.
I could move the declaration itself closer to the if statement while still keeping whole statement in one line.
On the other hand I'm not so sure if it makes any real difference to have assignment right next to the if statement compared to a few lines above it.
Regards, Giedrius
| |