On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Robert Pearce <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Anand, > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 23:13:51 +0530 you wrote: >> Not sure if these are false positives, but it does shut the >> compiler up. > > Surely that's not acceptable! If they aren't false positives, and the > pointers really are "used uninitialized", then initializing them to > NULL isn't actually any safer than what was there before. Just shutting > the compiler up is only acceptable if you can also say "and I've > confirmed that this is a safe way to fix it". > > > (Sorry, I deal with safety related software at work and things done "to > shut the compiler up" or "so that Lint doesn't complain" are a common > source of bugs.) Point taken. I've now gone through the code in a little more detail. These variables are never used before being assigned to with a clk_get. There is then a check for IS_ERR(dc_clk) or IS_ERR(hhc_clk) before these variables are actually used anywhere in this function. However looking at the code makes me think there is some more cleanup that can be done in this function. I'll do that and resubmit. Please ignore this patch. - Anand -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
