From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757542AbaFZC3A (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 22:29:00 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:46838 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757207AbaFZC26 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 22:28:58 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: mlrUuzZ1+UFG0jFfomHTmurAl6AeJFAFLUt8xgwyaDLb 1403749737 Message-ID: <1403749735.2969.25.camel@perseus.fritz.box> Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs4 - fix false positive compile error From: Ian Kent To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-fsdevel , autofs mailing list , Kernel Mailing List Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:28:55 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20140625130648.1e3cd0e578602918dc38bb6a@linux-foundation.org> References: <20140625124939.31035.84884.stgit@perseus.fritz.box> <20140625130648.1e3cd0e578602918dc38bb6a@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-2.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 13:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 20:49:39 +0800 Ian Kent wrote: > > > On strict build environments we can see: > > > > fs/autofs4/inode.c: In function 'autofs4_fill_super': > > fs/autofs4/inode.c:312: error: 'pgrp' may be used uninitialized in this > > function > > make[2]: *** [fs/autofs4/inode.o] Error 1 > > make[1]: *** [fs/autofs4] Error 2 > > make: *** [fs] Error 2 > > make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > > > This is due to the use of pgrp_set being used to indicate pgrp has > > has been set rather than initializing pgrp itself. > > > > Yes, that code seems to be explicitly designed to trigger a gcc warning ;) > > What is a "strict build environment"? Someone's using -Werror for the > entire kernel? That must make for a miserable life. Yes, TBH I was a bit surprised myself. It resulted from a RHEL-6.6 patch submission. I didn't notice it and ended up missing an internal (RedHat) patch submission deadline as my original interest in these was the result of an upstream discussion and I stupidly relied on my upstream testing. It might just be that our internal up and coming file system tree is specifically more fussy but never the less I got caught out. Ian