Re: [PATCH *-next 00/18] Remove weird and needless 'return' for void APIs

[Zijun Hu <zijun_hu@icloud.com>]

On 2025/2/22 03:36, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-02-21 at 11:00 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> Is this something that could be done with a coccinelle script?
>>
> Almost enough to do this:
> 
> @@
> identifier fn;
> expression E;
> @@
> void fn(...)
> {
> ...
> -return
> E;
> }
> 
> 
> It takes a long time to run though, and does some wrong things as well:
> if the return is in the middle of the function, it still matches and
> removes it erroneously.

if return is in the middle, we may need to convert the return statement
in to two statement as [PATCH 18/18] does:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221-rmv_return-v1-18-cc8dff275827@quicinc.com/

namely, Convert  "return func(...);" to "func(...); return;"

C spec such as C17 have this description about return
statement:
6.8.6.4:
A return statement with an expression shall not appear in a function
whose return type is void. A return statement without an expression
shall only appear in a function whose return type is void.


so, do we need to treat "return void function in void function" as
bad code style and make coccinelle script check this bad usage?