On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:57 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:19:30AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > After merging the xfs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > produced this warning:
> >
> > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c: In function 'xfs_end_io':
> > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c:232: warning: 'error' may be used uninitialized in this function
> >
> > Introduced by commit 77d7a0c2eeb285c9069e15396703d0cb9690ac50 ("xfs:
> > Non-blocking inode locking in IO completion").
> >
> > I can't tell if this is a false positive. If the first two "if"
> > statement bodies are skipped, then error is tested uninitialised. It is
> > possible that at least one of them has to be executed.
>
> Right, there is a warning being generated there - I thought I fixed
> that immediately after posting the first version of the patch. The
> second version:
>
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2010-02/msg00340.html
>
> definitely had it fixed.
>
> Alex, can you make sure you take the entire patch rather than
> cutting and pasting bits from one patch version to another? That
> way you don't miss small changes to the patch that might have been
> forgotten about....
(Sorry if this gets duplicated--I was using a web-based mail
interface yesterday and my first attempt got bounced back
as potential spam.)
I didn't expect you would change the patch content, only
the description. I had already tested the previous code
so just grabbed the new description when you re-posted.
Sorry about the warning slipping through. I'll incorporate
your fix soon.
-Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
