* linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree
@ 2010-03-04 0:19 Stephen Rothwell
2010-03-04 0:57 ` [PATCH] " Dave Chinner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2010-03-04 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Chinner, xfs-masters; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 689 bytes --]
Hi Dave,
After merging the xfs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
produced this warning:
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c: In function 'xfs_end_io':
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c:232: warning: 'error' may be used uninitialized in this function
Introduced by commit 77d7a0c2eeb285c9069e15396703d0cb9690ac50 ("xfs:
Non-blocking inode locking in IO completion").
I can't tell if this is a false positive. If the first two "if"
statement bodies are skipped, then error is tested uninitialised. It is
possible that at least one of them has to be executed.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* [PATCH] Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree
2010-03-04 0:19 linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2010-03-04 0:57 ` Dave Chinner
2010-03-04 16:24 ` Alex Elder
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2010-03-04 0:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: xfs-masters, linux-next, linux-kernel, xfs, aelder
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:19:30AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> After merging the xfs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> produced this warning:
>
> fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c: In function 'xfs_end_io':
> fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c:232: warning: 'error' may be used uninitialized in this function
>
> Introduced by commit 77d7a0c2eeb285c9069e15396703d0cb9690ac50 ("xfs:
> Non-blocking inode locking in IO completion").
>
> I can't tell if this is a false positive. If the first two "if"
> statement bodies are skipped, then error is tested uninitialised. It is
> possible that at least one of them has to be executed.
Right, there is a warning being generated there - I thought I fixed
that immediately after posting the first version of the patch. The
second version:
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2010-02/msg00340.html
definitely had it fixed.
Alex, can you make sure you take the entire patch rather than
cutting and pasting bits from one patch version to another? That
way you don't miss small changes to the patch that might have been
forgotten about....
Stephen, the patch below should fix the warning.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
xfs: fix uninitialised variable warning in xfs_end_io
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
---
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c
index f41a2d8..8989c16 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ xfs_end_io(
{
xfs_ioend_t *ioend = container_of(work, xfs_ioend_t, io_work);
struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(ioend->io_inode);
- int error;
+ int error = 0;
/*
* For unwritten extents we need to issue transactions to convert a
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree
2010-03-04 0:57 ` [PATCH] " Dave Chinner
@ 2010-03-04 16:24 ` Alex Elder
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Elder @ 2010-03-04 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, xfs-masters, linux-next, linux-kernel, xfs
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:57 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:19:30AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > After merging the xfs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > produced this warning:
> >
> > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c: In function 'xfs_end_io':
> > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c:232: warning: 'error' may be used uninitialized in this function
> >
> > Introduced by commit 77d7a0c2eeb285c9069e15396703d0cb9690ac50 ("xfs:
> > Non-blocking inode locking in IO completion").
> >
> > I can't tell if this is a false positive. If the first two "if"
> > statement bodies are skipped, then error is tested uninitialised. It is
> > possible that at least one of them has to be executed.
>
> Right, there is a warning being generated there - I thought I fixed
> that immediately after posting the first version of the patch. The
> second version:
>
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2010-02/msg00340.html
>
> definitely had it fixed.
>
> Alex, can you make sure you take the entire patch rather than
> cutting and pasting bits from one patch version to another? That
> way you don't miss small changes to the patch that might have been
> forgotten about....
(Sorry if this gets duplicated--I was using a web-based mail
interface yesterday and my first attempt got bounced back
as potential spam.)
I didn't expect you would change the patch content, only
the description. I had already tested the previous code
so just grabbed the new description when you re-posted.
Sorry about the warning slipping through. I'll incorporate
your fix soon.
-Alex
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-03-04 16:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-03-04 0:19 linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree Stephen Rothwell
2010-03-04 0:57 ` [PATCH] " Dave Chinner
2010-03-04 16:24 ` Alex Elder
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).