A return statement is unnecessarily complicated, currently value
in variable mask is bitwise-masked and the variable is being
updated and then returned. Just updating the mask is all that is
required as the following statement is a return.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/ata/pata_ali.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
index ab28a6707b94..1b90cda27246 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static unsigned long ali_20_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned long mask)
 		mask &= ~(ATA_MASK_MWDMA | ATA_MASK_UDMA);
 	ata_id_c_string(adev->id, model_num, ATA_ID_PROD, sizeof(model_num));
 	if (strstr(model_num, "WDC"))
-		return mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
+		mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
 	return mask;
 }
 
-- 
2.33.1

On 1/13/22 08:47, Colin Ian King wrote:
> A return statement is unnecessarily complicated, currently value
> in variable mask is bitwise-masked and the variable is being
> updated and then returned. Just updating the mask is all that is
> required as the following statement is a return.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/ata/pata_ali.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
> index ab28a6707b94..1b90cda27246 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static unsigned long ali_20_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned long mask)
>  		mask &= ~(ATA_MASK_MWDMA | ATA_MASK_UDMA);
>  	ata_id_c_string(adev->id, model_num, ATA_ID_PROD, sizeof(model_num));
>  	if (strstr(model_num, "WDC"))
> -		return mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;

Yeah, not to mention that is really ugly as the return should really
have been:

return mask & ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;

> +		mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
>  	return mask;
>  }
>  

Will queue this up.

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

On 12/01/2022 23:52, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 1/13/22 08:47, Colin Ian King wrote:
>> A return statement is unnecessarily complicated, currently value
>> in variable mask is bitwise-masked and the variable is being
>> updated and then returned. Just updating the mask is all that is
>> required as the following statement is a return.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/ata/pata_ali.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
>> index ab28a6707b94..1b90cda27246 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_ali.c
>> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static unsigned long ali_20_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned long mask)
>>   		mask &= ~(ATA_MASK_MWDMA | ATA_MASK_UDMA);
>>   	ata_id_c_string(adev->id, model_num, ATA_ID_PROD, sizeof(model_num));
>>   	if (strstr(model_num, "WDC"))
>> -		return mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
> 
> Yeah, not to mention that is really ugly as the return should really
> have been:
> 
> return mask & ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;

Yep, I did think of that as the original intention, but two return 
statements one after the other was equally as ugly. It was a 50/50 
choice of what was perceived as the better fix :-)

> 
>> +		mask &= ~ATA_MASK_UDMA;
>>   	return mask;
>>   }
>>   
> 
> Will queue this up.
> 
Thank you.