At Wed, 4 Aug 2010 10:02:24 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 03:20:26PM -0400, Bill Pemberton wrote:
quiet the warning about use of uninitialized fll_div in wm8900_set_fll. fll_div is initialized by fll_factors()
Signed-off-by: Bill Pemberton wfp5p@virginia.edu
Always remember to CC maintainers on patches as covered in SubmittingPatches.
sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c b/sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c index 5da17a7..f1840c6 100644 --- a/sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c @@ -746,7 +746,7 @@ static int wm8900_set_fll(struct snd_soc_codec *codec, int fll_id, unsigned int freq_in, unsigned int freq_out) { struct wm8900_priv *wm8900 = snd_soc_codec_get_drvdata(codec);
- struct _fll_div fll_div;
- struct _fll_div uninitialized_var(fll_div); unsigned int reg;
No, just stomping over the variable to shut up the warning doesn't improve anything at all. You need to make sure that the compiler can actually follow the control flow to see that the data is always initialised rather than disabling the check and missing any actual issues.
I rather suspect this is just a bug in your compiler's flow analysis, it's not showing up with GCC 4.3.3 on ARM for me.
Yes, the uninitialized_var() thing is rarely useful because most cases are false-positive. If such an initialization is really needed, often it indicates the need of refactoring.
All the patches posted here look unnecessary, so I'd like to skip.
thanks,
Takashi