2013/8/22 James Bottomley <jbottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:42 +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote: >> 2013/8/22 Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> >>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > >> > Joe> I don't get this build warning in the first place and I think the >> > Joe> scsi_debug file is quite old and probably doesn't need to be >> > Joe> changed at all. >> > >> > guard isn't a boolean, it selects the checksum algorithm used. >> > >> > Also, I believe Akinobu's recent reorganization of this code in question >> > fixed the warning. >> >> Unfortunately, this warning isn't fixed in linux-next, either. >> Paul Bolle also sent a patch that fixes the same warning in a little >> bit different way. > > Well, it is and it isn't. Whether you see the warning seems to depend > on how gcc was built. My take is that an impossible default case just > to keep some versions of gcc quiet is a bit pointless. As Joe said in the other reply, scsi_debug_guard could be a negative value (scsi_debug_guard > 1 is only prohibited). So this warning does not seem a false positive. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
