Re: [PATCH v1 iwl-next] igc: Add support for LEDs on i225/i226

[Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1287 bytes --]

On Wed Jan 24 2024, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 09:24:08AM +0100, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> +static int igc_led_hw_control_set(struct led_classdev *led_cdev,
>> +				  unsigned long flags)
>> +{
>> +	struct igc_led_classdev *ldev = lcdev_to_igc_ldev(led_cdev);
>> +	struct igc_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(ldev->netdev);
>> +	bool blink = false;
>> +	u32 mode;
>> +
>> +	if (flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_LINK_10))
>> +		mode = IGC_LEDCTL_MODE_LINK_10;
>> +	if (flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_LINK_100))
>> +		mode = IGC_LEDCTL_MODE_LINK_100;
>> +	if (flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_LINK_1000))
>> +		mode = IGC_LEDCTL_MODE_LINK_1000;
>> +	if (flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_LINK_2500))
>> +		mode = IGC_LEDCTL_MODE_LINK_2500;
>> +	if ((flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_TX)) ||
>> +	    (flags & BIT(TRIGGER_NETDEV_RX)))
>> +		mode = IGC_LEDCTL_MODE_ACTIVITY;
>
> Hi Kurt,
>
> I guess this can't happen in practice,
> but if none of the conditions above are met,
> then mode is used uninitialised below.

Yes, it shouldn't happen, because the supported modes are
checked. However, mode can be initialized to off to avoid the warning.

>
> Flagged by Smatch.

Out of curiosity how did you get the warning? I usually run `make W=1 C=1
M=...` before sending patches.

Thanks,
Kurt

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 861 bytes --]