From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f71.google.com (mail-oi0-f71.google.com [209.85.218.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA756B0005 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:39:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f71.google.com with SMTP id w207so162585390oiw.1 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 19:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com. [119.145.14.66]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k27si21645332ioo.50.2016.07.29.19.39.12 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Jul 2016 19:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <579C132C.5050407@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 10:38:36 +0800 From: zhong jiang MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: wipe off the compiler warn References: <1469803600-44293-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com> <20160729160247.564e27525f04416ef714ddd4@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20160729160247.564e27525f04416ef714ddd4@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2016/7/30 7:02, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:46:39 +0800 zhongjiang wrote: > >> From: zhong jiang >> >> when compile the kenrel code, I happens to the following warn. >> fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c:1156:2: warning: ___new_insert_key___ may be used >> uninitialized in this function. >> memcpy(new_insert_key_addr, &new_insert_key, KEY_SIZE); >> ^ >> The patch just fix it to avoid the warn. >> >> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang >> --- >> fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c b/fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c >> index b751eea..512ce95 100644 >> --- a/fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c >> +++ b/fs/reiserfs/ibalance.c >> @@ -818,7 +818,7 @@ int balance_internal(struct tree_balance *tb, >> int order; >> int insert_num, n, k; >> struct buffer_head *S_new; >> - struct item_head new_insert_key; >> + struct item_head uninitialized_var(new_insert_key); >> struct buffer_head *new_insert_ptr = NULL; >> struct item_head *new_insert_key_addr = insert_key; > How do we know this isn't a real bug? It isn't obvious to me that this > warning is a false positive. > > > . > yes ,it maybe a real bug, I will resend it in v2. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org