Linux ATA/IDE development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Elias Oltmanns <eo@nebensachen.de>
Cc: Alex Chiang <achiang@hp.com>,
	jeff@redhat.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stop gcc warning about uninitialized 'dev' in	ata_scsi_scan_host
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:08:55 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48F6DA77.7090303@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r66hjcwv.fsf@denkblock.local>

Elias Oltmanns wrote:
>> I think the current policy is blaming gcc but I also added quite a few
>> bogus NULL initializations here and there and caught several bugs thanks
>> to those warnings.  We can think about adding an additional annotation
>> with leading double underbars which indicate that certain pointer
>> arguments to functions expect (or are okay with) pointers to
>> uninitialized variables which should be able to remove many of those
>> spurious warnings (on the caller side, the compiler can ignore the
>> warning and on the callee side the compiler can check whether it's being
>> dereferenced without being written to).  Does anyone know whether gcc
>> already has that type of annotation?
> 
> Well, I don't know of this particular kind of annotation. However, I
> don't quite see how that would solve the reported issue.

I was thinking about the warning in sata_via.c and for such cases the
compiler doesn't have any other way of figuring out whether it's okay
or not (the sata_via case, the compiler can actually do as the callee
is in the same file but you know what I mean).

> Here, dev is a local variable and the warning is generated due to
> the line
> 
> 		if (dev != last_failed_dev) {
> 
> For this sort of thing we have:
> 
> 	struct ata_device *uninitialized_var(dev);

Ah.. thanks.

> Or is that precisely the thing you did *not* want?

I don't know.  Later versions of gcc doesn't issue warning because it
knows "if (!link)" always triggers if dev is not initialized.  I don't
think we should be adding those annotations if the current gen
compiler can already figure that out as it only decreases
debuggability when something actually gets broken there.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-16  6:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-15 23:25 [PATCH] stop gcc warning about uninitialized 'dev' in ata_scsi_scan_host Alex Chiang
2008-10-16  2:11 ` Tejun Heo
2008-10-16  3:40   ` Alex Chiang
2008-10-16  3:54     ` Tejun Heo
2008-10-16  6:02       ` Elias Oltmanns
2008-10-16  6:08         ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2008-10-16  6:16     ` Adrian Bunk
2008-10-16 21:21       ` Alex Chiang
2008-10-16 21:22       ` Alex Chiang
2008-10-16 21:24         ` Randy.Dunlap

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=48F6DA77.7090303@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=achiang@hp.com \
    --cc=eo@nebensachen.de \
    --cc=jeff@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox