On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 04:54:14PM -0600, Larry Finger wrote:
> This wrapper returned the result of mutex_lock_interruptible(); however,
> none of the callers checked the returned value.
Then why is the code logic changing?
>
> As a result of a gcc upgrade to version 4.8.1, two false unitialized variable
> warnings appeared. To silence the warnings, they are initialized to 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c | 8 +++++---
> drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/include/osdep_service.h | 9 ---------
> drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/os_dep/os_intfs.c | 3 ++-
> 4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> index c197b22..e95a1ba 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> @@ -4429,7 +4429,8 @@ s32 dump_mgntframe_and_wait_ack(struct adapter *padapter, struct xmit_frame *pmg
> if (padapter->bSurpriseRemoved || padapter->bDriverStopped)
> return -1;
>
> - _enter_critical_mutex(&pxmitpriv->ack_tx_mutex, NULL);
> + if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&pxmitpriv->ack_tx_mutex))
> + return -1;
That's not what the original code did, so this change could cause
problems, right?
> -static inline int _enter_critical_mutex(struct mutex *pmutex,
> - unsigned long *pirqL)
> -{
> - int ret;
> -
> - ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(pmutex);
> - return ret;
> -}
This didn't affect the caller function's code path...
I've applied this series up to here.
thanks,
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
