http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12676 ------- Comment #2 from tytso@xxxxxxx 2009-02-10 10:21 ------- On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 03:15:49AM -0800, bugme-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12676 > > Summary: fs/ext4/extents.c: In function > ‘ext4_ext_search_right’: fs/ext4/extents.c:1120: > warning: ‘ix’ may be used uninitialized in this > function > When compiling gets this error on Ext4 FS: > "fs/ext4/extents.c: In function ‘ext4_ext_search_right’: > fs/ext4/extents.c:1120: warning: ‘ix’ may be used uninitialized in this > function > " What version of gcc are you using to compile your kernel? This looks like the case of "gcc is stupid not to notice that depth must be non-zero, so ix is always initialized". Which doesn't seem to be the case with gcc 4.3.2, but it might be true with an older version of gcc. We can shut up gcc by forcibly initializing ix, but if this is only a problem with older gcc's, as it seems, it's probably best not to clutter the source (and the compiled binary) with an unneeded initialization: /* go up and search for index to the right */ while (--depth >= 0) { ix = path[depth].p_idx; if (ix != EXT_LAST_INDEX(path[depth].p_hdr)) goto got_index; } /* we've gone up to the root and found no index to the right */ return 0; got_index: /* we've found index to the right, let's * follow it and find the closest allocated * block to the right */ ix++; ^^^^^ Gee, aren't (some verions of) gcc stupid? - Ted -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
