From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] drivers/atm/firestream.c: suppress uninitialized var warning Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:57:32 +0100 Message-ID: <20080331155732.GK9785@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20080328165437.bfd7726c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080328.165812.253071507.davem@davemloft.net> <20080328171128.ff03ec02.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080328.173523.66723417.davem@davemloft.net> <20080328173946.23903be0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, chas@cmf.nrl.navy.mil, jeff@garzik.org To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:47755 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750943AbYCaP5h (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:57:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080328173946.23903be0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 05:39:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:35:23 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote: > > > From: Andrew Morton > > Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:11:28 -0700 > > > > > Plus uninitialized_var() gives us something to grep for and > > > experiment with if/when future gcc's get smarter. > > > > That's sounds like a great investment of your time. > > > > I guess there aren't any more interesting things to work > > on, nor bugs to fix. > > So you're all outa reasons. Not really... "we know better, gcc must STFU" applies _now_. And gcc getting smarter is not the only way it can become false - code change in the function can create real uninitialized use. gcc tends to change the warning on that, but not if it's told to STFU in either way. IOW, my preference would be to leave the warning as is.