From: ye xingchen ye.xingchen@zte.com.cn
Return the value adjtimex() directly instead of storing it in another redundant variable.
Reported-by: Zeal Robot zealci@zte.com.cn Signed-off-by: ye xingchen ye.xingchen@zte.com.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c b/tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c index 48b9a803235a..4bca39e0bd16 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c @@ -50,12 +50,10 @@ int clock_adjtime(clockid_t id, struct timex *tx) int clear_time_state(void) { struct timex tx; - int ret;
tx.modes = ADJ_STATUS; tx.status = 0; - ret = adjtimex(&tx); - return ret; + return adjtimex(&tx); }
#define NUM_FREQ_VALID 32
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 06:32:02AM +0000, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
From: ye xingchen ye.xingchen@zte.com.cn
Return the value adjtimex() directly instead of storing it in another redundant variable.
Reported-by: Zeal Robot zealci@zte.com.cn Signed-off-by: ye xingchen ye.xingchen@zte.com.cn
Once again, as this seems to keep being forgotten, you are sending multiple patches all from the same gmail.com account, yet are claiming they are from different people from a company that no one from that company has agreed is actually at that company.
Then there's the whole "ignoring Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst" issues, which would disqualify the changes anyway.
So we can not take these patches at all.
Please fix up your corporate email structures so that you can properly submit changes to the kernel that can be verified to actually come from your company. Otherwise they can not be accepted at all for obvious reasons (ZTE would not want to have people claiming to work for them that are not actually working for them, right?)
thanks,
greg k-h
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
cgel.zte＠gmail.com -
Greg KH