On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:08:15AM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
>> This commit change init point of two variables to forward them to
>> init time. This variables are just being assigned some lines after
>> and it is more clear to init them when the init value is known and
>> in this case this is known when they are declared.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c | 7 ++-----
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
>> index 11839af..18e2350 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
>> @@ -981,14 +981,11 @@ static void ks7010_private_init(struct ks_wlan_private *priv,
>> static int ks7010_sdio_probe(struct sdio_func *func,
>> const struct sdio_device_id *device)
>> {
>> - struct ks_wlan_private *priv;
>> + struct ks_wlan_private *priv = NULL;
>> + struct net_device *netdev = NULL;
>> struct ks_sdio_card *card;
>> - struct net_device *netdev;
>> int ret;
>>
>> - priv = NULL;
>> - netdev = NULL;
>
> It's better if we don't initialize these at all. There is a bug here
> and GCC finds it when these aren't initialized to bogus values:
>
> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c: In function ‘ks7010_sdio_probe’:
> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c:932:2: warning: ‘priv’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
I see... but I am not getting any warning in my tree making them
initialized. Am I missing something?
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
Best regards,
Sergio Paracuellos
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
