Re: [patch] Btrfs: silence a compiler warning

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 08:29:26AM -0800, David Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:30:55AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >Gcc warns that "ret" can be used uninitialized.  It can't actually be
> >used uninitialized because btrfs_num_copies() always returns 1 or more.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >diff --git a/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c b/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> >index 064b29b..c053e90 100644
> >--- a/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> >+++ b/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> >@@ -643,7 +643,7 @@ static struct btrfsic_dev_state *btrfsic_dev_state_hashtable_lookup(
> >static int btrfsic_process_superblock(struct btrfsic_state *state,
> >				      struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
> >{
> >-	int ret;
> >+	int ret = 0;
> 
> Does
> 
> 	int uninitialized_var(ret);
> 
> work?  The assignment to zero actually generates additional
> (unnecessary) code.

Sure.  I can resend it.

regards,
dan carpenter

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux