Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] gpio: Add GPIO Aggregator/Repeater driver

From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Harish Jenny K N <harish_kandiga@mentor.com>,
	Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Phil Reid <preid@electromag.com.au>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
	"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] gpio: Add GPIO Aggregator/Repeater driver
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 15:33:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVMoo0rJ-Ji1ek-DqHEkRqM5Fk5o9RzQV08Z8SSdS9APA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191127141529.GA18189@vmlxhi-102.adit-jv.com>

Hi Eugeniu,

On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:15 PM Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 09:42:51AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > +static bool isrange(const char *s)
> > +{
> > +     size_t n = strlen(s);
>
> Cppcheck 1.40-18521-ge6d692d96058:
> drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c:69:11: style: Variable 'n' is assigned a value that is never used. [unreadVariable]
>
> Smatch v0.5.0-6150-gc1ed13e4ee7b:
> drivers/gpio/gpio-aggregator.c:69 isrange() warn: unused return: n = strlen()

Correct, this is a remainder of code present temporarily during development.
Will drop.

(where are the days gcc itself warned about that?)

> > +     aggr->lookups->dev_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s.%d", DRV_NAME, id);
> > +     if (!aggr->lookups) {
> > +             res = -ENOMEM;
> > +             goto remove_idr;
> > +     }
>
> s/aggr->lookups/aggr->lookups->dev_id/ ?

Thanks, will fix.

> > +static int gpio_fwd_get_multiple(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned long *mask,
> > +                              unsigned long *bits)
> > +{
> > +     struct gpiochip_fwd *fwd = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> > +     unsigned long *values, flags;
>
> gcc 9.2.1:
> warning: ‘flags’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>
> [..]
>
> > +static void gpio_fwd_set_multiple(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned long *mask,
> > +                               unsigned long *bits)
> > +{
> > +     struct gpiochip_fwd *fwd = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> > +     unsigned long *values, flags;
>
> gcc 9.2.1, same as above:
> warning: ‘flags’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]

So newer gcc is (again) no longer smart enough to notice the check is
the same for initializer and user...

> Should these be silenced like in 2bf593f101f3ca ("xilinx_uartps.c:
> suppress "may be used uninitialised" warning") ?

TBH, I'm not a big fan of silencing false positives.
But if people like to see flags preinitialized to zero, that can be done...

> I plan to do some runtime testing soon.

Thanks, looking forward to the results!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds