There seems to be no need to add the ignore_value wrapper or
caste with (void) to the unlink() calls, so let's just remove
them. I assume at one point in time Coverity complained. So,
let's just be consistent - those that care to check the return
status can and those that don't can just have the naked unlink.

Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@redhat.com>
---

 As a result of Michal's review comment on my recent storage driver
 error path series...

 src/conf/virsecretobj.c           | 2 +-
 src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c | 2 +-
 src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c      | 2 +-
 src/storage/storage_driver.c      | 4 ++--
 src/util/virfilecache.c           | 2 +-
 src/util/virnetdev.c              | 2 +-
 6 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/conf/virsecretobj.c b/src/conf/virsecretobj.c
index 2ff2998c15..78911c0908 100644
--- a/src/conf/virsecretobj.c
+++ b/src/conf/virsecretobj.c
@@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ virSecretObjDeleteData(virSecretObjPtr obj)
 {
     /* The configFile will already be removed, so secret won't be
      * loaded again if this fails */
-    (void)unlink(obj->base64File);
+    unlink(obj->base64File);
 }
 
 
diff --git a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c b/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c
index 2330ba0479..6d114557c7 100644
--- a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c
+++ b/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c
@@ -1923,7 +1923,7 @@ virNWFilterSnoopLeaseFileRefresh(void)
     if (rename(TMPLEASEFILE, LEASEFILE) < 0) {
         virReportSystemError(errno, _("rename(\"%s\", \"%s\")"),
                              TMPLEASEFILE, LEASEFILE);
-        ignore_value(unlink(TMPLEASEFILE));
+        unlink(TMPLEASEFILE);
     }
     virAtomicIntSet(&virNWFilterSnoopState.wLeases, 0);
 
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
index 04c2adcfb5..394202942f 100644
--- a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
+++ b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
@@ -4304,7 +4304,7 @@ virQEMUCapsInitQMPCommandAbort(virQEMUCapsInitQMPCommandPtr cmd)
     cmd->cmd = NULL;
 
     if (cmd->monpath)
-        ignore_value(unlink(cmd->monpath));
+        unlink(cmd->monpath);
 
     virDomainObjEndAPI(&cmd->vm);
 
diff --git a/src/storage/storage_driver.c b/src/storage/storage_driver.c
index bf43d77c8b..7c22c43584 100644
--- a/src/storage/storage_driver.c
+++ b/src/storage/storage_driver.c
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ storagePoolRefreshFailCleanup(virStorageBackendPtr backend,
     virErrorPtr orig_err = virSaveLastError();
 
     if (stateFile)
-        ignore_value(unlink(stateFile));
+        unlink(stateFile);
     if (backend->stopPool)
         backend->stopPool(obj);
     if (orig_err) {
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ storagePoolUpdateStateCallback(virStoragePoolObjPtr obj,
         virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
                        _("Failed to initialize storage pool '%s': %s"),
                        def->name, virGetLastErrorMessage());
-        ignore_value(unlink(stateFile));
+        unlink(stateFile);
         active = false;
     }
 
diff --git a/src/util/virfilecache.c b/src/util/virfilecache.c
index 2927c68358..15c0d99fd9 100644
--- a/src/util/virfilecache.c
+++ b/src/util/virfilecache.c
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ virFileCacheLoad(virFileCachePtr cache,
 
     if (!cache->handlers.isValid(loadData, cache->priv)) {
         VIR_DEBUG("Outdated cached capabilities '%s' for '%s'", file, name);
-        ignore_value(unlink(file));
+        unlink(file);
         ret = 0;
         goto cleanup;
     }
diff --git a/src/util/virnetdev.c b/src/util/virnetdev.c
index 39c91313de..e94960c9da 100644
--- a/src/util/virnetdev.c
+++ b/src/util/virnetdev.c
@@ -2161,7 +2161,7 @@ virNetDevReadNetConfig(const char *linkdev, int vf,
     }
 
     /* we won't need the file again */
-    ignore_value(unlink(filePath));
+    unlink(filePath);
 
     ret = 0;
  cleanup:
-- 
2.17.1

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 08:12:06AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
> There seems to be no need to add the ignore_value wrapper or
> caste with (void) to the unlink() calls, so let's just remove
> them. I assume at one point in time Coverity complained. So,
> let's just be consistent - those that care to check the return
> status can and those that don't can just have the naked unlink.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@redhat.com>
> ---
>
>  As a result of Michal's review comment on my recent storage driver
>  error path series...

MinGW is happy, Clang is happy, what more can one wish for?! :)

Reviewed-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list