From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:15:08 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: iproc: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning
In-Reply-To: <31c4c52b-3de5-2277-7a44-2a4231531074@broadcom.com>
References: <20161122141844.1655574-1-arnd@arndb.de>
 <20161122141844.1655574-2-arnd@arndb.de>
 <31c4c52b-3de5-2277-7a44-2a4231531074@broadcom.com>
Message-ID: <2504851.C6gOdhdaGF@wuerfel>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 9:45:24 AM CET Ray Jui wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc.c b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc.c
> > index 857ff5198317..0359569c8d78 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc.c
> > @@ -936,6 +936,7 @@ static int iproc_pcie_setup_ib(struct iproc_pcie *pcie,
> >  
> >               }
> >       }
> > +     ret = -EINVAL;
> >  err_ib:
> >       dev_err(dev, "unable to configure inbound mapping\n");
> >       dev_err(dev, "axi %pap, pci %pap, res size %pap\n",
> > 
> 
> This change is good, but in my opinion, a further improvement for
> clarity would be to initialize 'ret' to -EINVAL in the beginning of this
> function when 'ret' is declared. What do you think?
> 

I never do that, see https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=232 for a great
explanation about why.

	Arnd