From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34397) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7S1f-00059Z-Ul for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:44:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7S1c-0005tK-PV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:44:31 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:31068) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7S1c-0005su-Hd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:44:28 -0400 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2DDiR0X019794 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:44:27 -0400 Message-ID: <4F5F4F22.7030006@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:44:02 +0200 From: Orit Wasserman MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1331143301-28408-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1331143301-28408-2-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <4F5F4D4D.1060600@redhat.com> <4F5F4E06.8030804@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5F4E06.8030804@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] virtio-blk: report non-zero status when failing SG_IO requests List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: amit.shah@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com On 03/13/2012 03:39 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 13/03/2012 14:36, Orit Wasserman ha scritto: >> I get to following compile error: >> In function =91virtio_blk_handle_request=92: >> virtio-blk.c:264:28: error: =91status=92 may be used uninitialized in = this function [-Werror=3Duninitialized] >> virtio-blk.c:151:9: note: =91status=92 was declared here >> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors >> >> Are you using -disable-werror ? >=20 > No, perhaps a different compiler though. could be I'm using (GCC) 4.6.1 20110908 (Red Hat 4.6.1-9) >=20 > Paolo