On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Some compiler versions are smart enough to detect a potentially > uninitialized variable, but are not smart enough to detect that this > cannot happen due to the code flow: > > ../hw/intc/i8259.c: In function ‘pic_read_irq’: > ../hw/intc/i8259.c:203:13: error: ‘irq2’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > 203 | irq = irq2 + 8; > | ~~~~^~~~~~~~~~ > > Restrict irq2 variable use to the inner statement. > > Fixes: 78ef2b6989f ("i8259: Reorder intack in pic_read_irq") > Reported-by: Christian Borntraeger > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > --- > Supersedes: <20210318154738.27094-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > --- > hw/intc/i8259.c | 11 ++++++----- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/intc/i8259.c b/hw/intc/i8259.c > index 344fd04db14..52c039c6c03 100644 > --- a/hw/intc/i8259.c > +++ b/hw/intc/i8259.c > @@ -176,10 +176,12 @@ static void pic_intack(PICCommonState *s, int irq) > int pic_read_irq(DeviceState *d) > { > PICCommonState *s = PIC_COMMON(d); > - int irq, irq2, intno; > + int irq, intno; > > irq = pic_get_irq(s); > if (irq >= 0) { > + int irq2; > + > if (irq == 2) { > irq2 = pic_get_irq(slave_pic); > if (irq2 >= 0) { > @@ -189,8 +191,11 @@ int pic_read_irq(DeviceState *d) > irq2 = 7; > } > intno = slave_pic->irq_base + irq2; > + pic_intack(s, irq); > + irq = irq2 + 8; > } else { > intno = s->irq_base + irq; > + pic_intack(s, irq); > } > pic_intack(s, irq); Do you still need this pic_intack() here or did you intend to move it in the if above? Regards, BALATON Zoltan > } else { > @@ -199,10 +204,6 @@ int pic_read_irq(DeviceState *d) > intno = s->irq_base + irq; > } > > - if (irq == 2) { > - irq = irq2 + 8; > - } > - > #ifdef DEBUG_IRQ_LATENCY > printf("IRQ%d latency=%0.3fus\n", > irq, >