On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:15:16 -0500 (EST) David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemmin...@vyatta.com> > Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:09:58 -0800 > > > On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:02:02 -0500 (EST) > > David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > > >> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemmin...@vyatta.com> > >> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 09:53:04 -0800 > >> > >> > There are actually lots of bogus warnings than seem to only occur > >> > because gcc 4.4 does a bad job of checking. Later versions are fixed > >> > and don't generate warnings. > >> > > >> > My preference is to not add the unnecessary initialization because > >> > if you get in the habit of doing it. The whole purpose of the > >> > uninitialized > >> > check is lost. > >> > >> Try again, this was with gcc-4.7.2-2 on Fedora. > >> > >> There are too many preconditions, across multiple basic block, which > >> together ensure the skb is in fact initialized at the point in > >> question and the compiler simply isn't sophisticated enough to see > >> that. > > > > Weird, it compiles clean on x86-84 on Debian. > > gcc-4.7.real (Debian 4.7.2-4) 4.7.2 > > Fedora backports a lot more stuff into gcc than Debian does. Probably. that's it. Plus Fedora has more gcc maintainers. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
