Re: [PATCH] qla2xxx: avoid maybe_uninitialized warning

[Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@qlogic.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1220 bytes --]



On 3/16/16, 5:59 AM, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

>On Tuesday 15 March 2016 14:49:14 James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 22:40 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > 
>> > This slightly rearranges the code to move the second if() block
>> > into the first one, to avoid the warning while retaining the
>> > behavior of the code.
>> 
>> I thought our usual policy was to ask someone to fix the compiler when
>> it emitted a spurious warning.
>
>No, the rule is that we shouldn't blindly add initializations to
>the variables when the compiler should have figured it out.
>
>In this case, I wouldn't expect the compiler to ever see through
>the unlikely() macro, and I'm not adding a potentially counterproductive
>initialization, so I see no reason not to apply the patch.

I would like to keep unlikely() macro in the code. This patch looks good.

Acked-By: Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@qlogic.com>

>
>Making it easier for the compiler to figure out what is going
>on should also lead to slightly better object code. If you think
>my patch makes it less readable, an alternative would be to remove
>the 'unlikely', which also gets rid of the warning.
>
>	Arnd


[-- Attachment #2: winmail.dat --]
[-- Type: application/ms-tnef, Size: 4603 bytes --]