Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758945AbbFBNYU (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2015 09:24:20 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com ([209.85.212.171]:38115 "EHLO mail-wi0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758740AbbFBNYH (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2015 09:24:07 -0400 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 14:24:03 +0100 From: Matt Fleming To: Ingo Molnar Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Jones Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI changes for v4.2 Message-ID: <20150602132403.GB6826@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <20150531162559.GA6826@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20150602064557.GB31128@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150602064557.GB31128@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2139 Lines: 62 On Tue, 02 Jun, at 08:45:57AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Pulled, thanks a lot Matt! > > I'm wondering about this commit: > > f2f6b587c553 ("efi/esrt: Fix some compiler warnings") > > It says, in part: > > This patch also fixes one other warning about an uninitialized variable > some compiler versions seem to see. You can't actually hit the code > path where it would be uninitialized, because there's a prior test that > would error out, but gcc hasn't figured that out. Anyway, it now has a > test and returns the error at both places. > > @@ -167,7 +167,6 @@ static struct kset *esrt_kset; > > static int esre_create_sysfs_entry(void *esre, int entry_num) > { > - int rc = 0; > struct esre_entry *entry; > char name[20]; > > @@ -180,13 +179,15 @@ static int esre_create_sysfs_entry(void *esre, int entry_num) > entry->kobj.kset = esrt_kset; > > if (esrt->fw_resource_version == 1) { > + int rc = 0; > + > entry->esre.esre1 = esre; > rc = kobject_init_and_add(&entry->kobj, &esre1_ktype, NULL, > "%s", name); > - } > - if (rc) { > - kfree(entry); > - return rc; > + if (rc) { > + kfree(entry); > + return rc; > + } > } > > list_add_tail(&entry->list, &entry_list); > > How can a compiler ever have warned about 'rc' being uninitialized? It's defined > straight at function entry, with initialization to 0. It can never be > uninitialized. Hmm... yeah good point. I admit that I missed that when merging this patch because I was focusing more on the fix for the kbuild warnings related to phys_addr_t. Peter? Where did you see gcc complaining about this? -- Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/