On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 01:40:37PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Jean Sacren wrote: > > warning: 'num_cpus' may be used uninitialized in this function > > > > Initialize 'num_cpus' variable to zero so that gcc doesn't complain. > > acpi_pad_pur() is referenced only once, so it should end up inlined, at > which point gcc really has no excuse to not determine with perfect > confidence whether num_cpus is being used unitialized or not. > If acpi_pad_pur() is called and returns with non-zero value, acpi_pad_handle_notify() happily returns, but num_cpus is referenced by address without being initialized, so gcc gives the warning. > > Looking at the code, it realy does look like a false positive. > Unfortunately it is _not_ a false positive. Here gcc does what it's supposed to do. Therefore, the patch is correct. -- Jean Sacren Bring LAMP To People -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
