On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:12 PM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It's now gone from the kernel so remove it from the deprecated API text. > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks Joe. Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/process/deprecated.rst | 18 ------------------ > 1 file changed, 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > index 918e32d76fc4..70720f00b9aa 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > @@ -51,24 +51,6 @@ to make sure their systems do not continue running in the face of > "unreachable" conditions. (For example, see commits like `this one > <https://git.kernel.org/linus/d4689846881d160a4d12a514e991a740bcb5d65a>`_.) > > -uninitialized_var() > -------------------- > -For any compiler warnings about uninitialized variables, just add > -an initializer. Using the uninitialized_var() macro (or similar > -warning-silencing tricks) is dangerous as it papers over `real bugs > -<https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200603174714.192027-1-glider@xxxxxxxxxx/>`_ > -(or can in the future), and suppresses unrelated compiler warnings > -(e.g. "unused variable"). If the compiler thinks it is uninitialized, > -either simply initialize the variable or make compiler changes. Keep in > -mind that in most cases, if an initialization is obviously redundant, > -the compiler's dead-store elimination pass will make sure there are no > -needless variable writes. > - > -As Linus has said, this macro > -`must <https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFw+Vbj0i=1TGqCR5vQkCzWJ0QxK6CernOU6eedsudAixw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/>`_ > -`be <https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFwgbgqhbp1fkxvRKEpzyR5J8n1vKT1VZdz9knmPuXhOeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/>`_ > -`removed <https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFz2500WfbKXAx8s67wrm9=yVJu65TpLgN_ybYNv0VEOKA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/>`_. > - > open-coded arithmetic in allocator arguments > -------------------------------------------- > Dynamic size calculations (especially multiplication) should not be > > -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
