Fix error of
error: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
Signed-off-by: Ou Shixiong <[email protected]>
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index 28caad17ccc7..0d5c87c52c33 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
@@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ static int scrub_simple_mirror(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
/* An artificial limit, inherit from old scrub behavior */
struct btrfs_path path = { 0 };
u64 cur_logical = logical_start;
- int ret;
+ int ret = 0;
/* The range must be inside the bg */
ASSERT(logical_start >= bg->start && logical_end <= bg->start + bg->length);
--
2.25.1
On 2023/6/8 10:49, Ou Shixiong wrote:
>
> Fix error of
> error: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
>
> Signed-off-by: Ou Shixiong <[email protected]>
Not again.
Please explain how @ret can be uninitialized, and your toolchain version.
To me, this looks like a false alert, and it's possible your toolchain
is out of date or lacks certain backports.
Thanks,
Qu
> ---
> fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> index 28caad17ccc7..0d5c87c52c33 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ static int scrub_simple_mirror(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
> /* An artificial limit, inherit from old scrub behavior */
> struct btrfs_path path = { 0 };
> u64 cur_logical = logical_start;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> /* The range must be inside the bg */
> ASSERT(logical_start >= bg->start && logical_end <= bg->start + bg->length);
>
>
> Content-type: Text/plain
>
> No virus found
> Checked by Hillstone Network AntiVirus
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 01:18:20PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/6/8 10:49, Ou Shixiong wrote:
> >
> > Fix error of
> > error: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ou Shixiong <[email protected]>
>
> Not again.
>
> Please explain how @ret can be uninitialized, and your toolchain version.
>
> To me, this looks like a false alert, and it's possible your toolchain
> is out of date or lacks certain backports.
Yeah, for obvious false altert warnings at least we need to know the
compiler, version and architecture.