Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 Ludwig Nussel wrote:
> > Index: dvb-apps/lib/libdvben50221/asn_1.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- dvb-apps.orig/lib/libdvben50221/asn_1.c
> > +++ dvb-apps/lib/libdvben50221/asn_1.c
> > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ uint8_t *asn_1_encode(uint16_t length, u
> >
> > while (temp) {
> > temp = temp >> 8;
> > - *asn_1_words++;
> > + (*asn_1_words)++;
> > }
> > if ((asn_1_array = (uint8_t *) malloc(*asn_1_words * sizeof (uint8_t))) == NULL) {
> > printf("%s: Memory allocation failed.\n", __FUNCTION__);
> > @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ uint8_t *asn_1_encode(uint16_t length, u
> > printf("%s: Allocated %d bytes.\n", __FUNCTION__, *asn_1_words);
> >
> > while (length) {
> > - asn_1_array[*asn_1_words--] = length & 0xff;
> > + asn_1_array[(*asn_1_words)--] = length & 0xff;
> > length = length >> 8;
> > }
> > return asn_1_array;
>
> This is not "fix gcc warnings". Have you tested it?
> (The first one looks like it fixes a bug, but without knowing what
> the code tries to do I can't tell.)
> Please split and send a seperate patch.
I did not test it but without the fix the code doesn't make any
sense. It would increment the _pointer_, dereference it and do
nothing with the result. It only makes sense if the content of
asn_1_words actually is a counter.
>
> > Index: dvb-apps/lib/libdvben50221/en50221_encode.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- dvb-apps.orig/lib/libdvben50221/en50221_encode.c
> > +++ dvb-apps/lib/libdvben50221/en50221_encode.c
> > @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ uint16_t en50221_encode_header(struct ca
> > uint16_t en50221_encode_descriptor(struct ca_msg * ca_msg,
> > struct ca_descriptor * desc, uint16_t pos)
> > {
> > - uint8_t i;
> > + uint8_t i = 0;
> > uint16_t temp = 0, private_bytes = 0;
> > temp = pos;
> >
> > Index: dvb-apps/libs/libdvb2/notifier.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- dvb-apps.orig/libs/libdvb2/notifier.c
> > +++ dvb-apps/libs/libdvb2/notifier.c
> > @@ -86,15 +86,14 @@ int dvb_revents(struct dvb * dvb, const
> > */
> > int dvb_revent(struct dvb * dvb, int fd, short revents)
> > {
> > - struct dvb_notifier * notifier;
>
> keep this
>
> > int i;
> >
> > if (revents == 0)
> > return 0;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i <= dvb->nb_notifiers; ++i) {
> > - if (dvb->notifiers.ptrs[i] == NULL ||
> > - dvb->pollfds[i].fd != fd)
> > + struct dvb_notifier * notifier = dvb->notifiers.ptrs[i];
>
> notifier = dvb->notifiers.ptrs[i];
>
> > + if (notifier == NULL || dvb->pollfds[i].fd != fd)
> > continue;
> >
> > dvb->pollfds[i].revents = revents;
It's not used outside of that loop. Same style as in dvb_revents.
> > Index: dvb-apps/util/scan/diseqc.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- dvb-apps.orig/util/scan/diseqc.c
> > +++ dvb-apps/util/scan/diseqc.c
> > @@ -37,9 +37,6 @@ void msleep(uint32_t msec)
> > ;
> > }
> >
> > -#define printf(x...)
> > -
> > -
>
> What's that? Was it unused or do you enable debug prints?
The line is a nop. printf doesn't occur anywhere in that file. gcc
warns because with fortifying features enabled printf is a macro.
cu
Ludwig
--
(o_ Ludwig Nussel
//\ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Development
V_/_ http://www.suse.de/
