On 24/04/15 12:10, Karol Wrona wrote:
> On 04/18/2015 09:02 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On 16/04/15 10:30, Karol Wrona wrote:
>>> calculated_time variable caused warning as uninitialized. It was not harmful
>>> because it was evaluated in the path in which was used later but it is to
>>> satisfy the checkers.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Karol Wrona <k.wrona@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Dumb compiler. It's a false positive and as the function is an inline in the header,
>> it should be able to tell.
>>
>> What compiler is spitting out the warning?
>
>
> You should have krobot complain in the mail.
> Subject: "include/linux/iio/buffer.h:142:32: warning: 'calculated_time'
> may be used uninitialized in this function"
>
> This was sh compiler. I suppose that we can treat it as false warning.
> It will complain whenever the variable will stay uninitialized even if
> not used in such path.
Yup. Seems false to me. Could report it if you are really bored :)
>
>
>>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iio/common/ssp_sensors/ssp_iio.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/common/ssp_sensors/ssp_iio.c b/drivers/iio/common/ssp_sensors/ssp_iio.c
>>> index a3ae165..16180e6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iio/common/ssp_sensors/ssp_iio.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/common/ssp_sensors/ssp_iio.c
>>> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ int ssp_common_process_data(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, void *buf,
>>> unsigned int len, int64_t timestamp)
>>> {
>>> __le32 time;
>>> - int64_t calculated_time;
>>> + int64_t calculated_time = 0;
>>> struct ssp_sensor_data *spd = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>>>
>>> if (indio_dev->scan_bytes == 0)
>>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
