From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>,
linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: remove redundant assignment to variable rc
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 12:28:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190731122841.GA1974@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r266seg4.fsf@suse.com>
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 12:09:31PM +0200, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
> Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com> writes:
> > Variable rc is being initialized with a value that is never read
> > and rc is being re-assigned a little later on. The assignment is
> > redundant and hence can be removed.
>
> I think I would actually rather have rc set to an error by default than
> uninitialized. Just my personal opinion.
You're just turning off GCC's static analysis (and introducing false
positives) when you do that. We have seen bugs caused by this and never
seen any bugs prevented by this style.
regards,
dan carpenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>,
linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: remove redundant assignment to variable rc
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:28:41 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190731122841.GA1974@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r266seg4.fsf@suse.com>
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 12:09:31PM +0200, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
> Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com> writes:
> > Variable rc is being initialized with a value that is never read
> > and rc is being re-assigned a little later on. The assignment is
> > redundant and hence can be removed.
>
> I think I would actually rather have rc set to an error by default than
> uninitialized. Just my personal opinion.
You're just turning off GCC's static analysis (and introducing false
positives) when you do that. We have seen bugs caused by this and never
seen any bugs prevented by this style.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-31 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-31 9:05 [PATCH] cifs: remove redundant assignment to variable rc Colin King
2019-07-31 9:05 ` Colin King
2019-07-31 10:09 ` Aurélien Aptel
2019-07-31 10:09 ` Aurélien Aptel
2019-07-31 12:28 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2019-07-31 12:28 ` Dan Carpenter
2019-07-31 15:34 ` Aurélien Aptel
2019-07-31 15:34 ` Aurélien Aptel
2019-07-31 15:54 ` Colin Ian King
2019-07-31 15:54 ` Colin Ian King
2019-08-01 17:00 ` Steve French
2019-08-01 17:00 ` Steve French
2019-08-01 8:03 ` Dan Carpenter
2019-08-01 8:03 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190731122841.GA1974@kadam \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=aaptel@suse.com \
--cc=colin.king@canonical.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samba-technical@lists.samba.org \
--cc=sfrench@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.