On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:08:27PM -0500, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote: > There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be > returned in some code paths. > > Setting to 0 prevents a random value from being returned. That'll shut up the warning but is the warning trying to tell us that there's a logic bug somewhere in the function and we're for example forgetting to look at a return value in some path in the function?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- From: Pierre-Louis Bossart
- Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- References:
- [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- From: Ethan Carter Edwards
- [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ASoC: imx-card: support playback or capture only
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: core: Change device numbering
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sof_sdw: initialize ret in asoc_sdw_rt_amp_spk_rtd_init()
- Index(es):
![]() |