Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/27] HFI: Add HFI adapter control structure

From: Jim Dykman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 23:21:11 -0400

On 3/2/2011 5:44 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 14:21 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> On Wed,  2 Mar 2011 16:09:48 -0500
>> [email-masked] wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/hfi/core/Makefile b/drivers/net/hfi/core/Makefile
>>> index 80790c6..6fe4e60 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/hfi/core/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/hfi/core/Makefile
>>> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>>>  #
>>>  # Makefile for the HFI device driver for IBM eServer System p
>>>  #
>>> -hfi_core-objs:=	hfidd_init.o
>>> +hfi_core-objs:=	hfidd_adpt.o \
>>> +		hfidd_init.o
>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_HFI) += hfi_core.o
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/hfi/core/hfidd_adpt.c b/drivers/net/hfi/core/hfidd_adpt.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..d64fa38
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/hfi/core/hfidd_adpt.c
> [...]
>>> +void hfidd_free_adapter(struct hfidd_acs *p_acs)
>>> +{
>>> +	kfree(p_acs);
>>> +	p_acs = NULL;
>>> +	return;
>>> +}
>>
>> If these were not in a separate file the could be marked as static.
> 
> I assume they're intending to add some more interesting code here in the
> next installment.
> 

Yes, there is more to come.

>> Doing a return; on last line of a void function is considered poor
>> style since it is unnecessary.
> 
> Assigning to a local variable just before returning is also silly.
> 
> Ben.
> 
Both removed in v2. 

Jim