From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:08:59 +0200
Subject: posix-cpu-timers: Remove pointless return value check
Patch-mainline: v5.4-rc1
Git-commit: 5405d0051f7ca820d1781d87baf4d730ff58f208
References: bsc#1162702

set_process_cpu_timer() checks already whether the clock id is valid. No
point in checking the return value of the sample function. That allows to
simplify the sample function later.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190821192920.339725769@linutronix.de
Acked-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
---
 kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c | 5 ++---
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c b/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
index aff7e3b64d84..5944b7494be7 100644
--- a/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
+++ b/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
@@ -1190,14 +1190,13 @@ void set_process_cpu_timer(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int clock_idx,
 			   u64 *newval, u64 *oldval)
 {
 	u64 now;
-	int ret;
 
 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(clock_idx >= CPUCLOCK_SCHED))
 		return;
 
-	ret = cpu_clock_sample_group(clock_idx, tsk, &now, true);
+	cpu_clock_sample_group(clock_idx, tsk, &now, true);
 
-	if (oldval && ret != -EINVAL) {
+	if (oldval) {
 		/*
 		 * We are setting itimer. The *oldval is absolute and we update
 		 * it to be relative, *newval argument is relative and we update
-- 
2.16.4