From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755114AbcLNINB (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2016 03:13:01 -0500 Received: from b.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.144]:44723 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754931AbcLNIMB (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2016 03:12:01 -0500 Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the tip tree To: Ingo Molnar , Stephen Rothwell References: <20161214132828.1d128963@canb.auug.org.au> <20161214072411.GA1635@gmail.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Artem Bityutskiy , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Gstir From: Richard Weinberger Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 09:05:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161214072411.GA1635@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen, Ingo, CC'ing David. On 14.12.2016 08:24, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) >> produced this warning: >> >> fs/ubifs/dir.c: In function 'ubifs_readdir': >> fs/ubifs/dir.c:629:13: warning: 'fstr_real_len' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >> fstr.len = fstr_real_len; >> ^ >> >> Introduced by commit >> >> f4f61d2cc6d8 ("ubifs: Implement encrypted filenames") >> >> This is a false positive because assignment and use are both protected by >> "if (encrypted)". >> >> I have no idea why this did not turn up earlier in my builds. > > FYI, f4f61d2cc6d8 is not in the -tip tree, so it cannot possibly have introduced > this warning. The commit comes via my UBIFS tree. But I never saw this warning, I'm testing with both gcc-4.8 and gcc-6.1. Let me investigate into that. Does today's tip change some compiler flags? Thanks, //richard