Stefan Weil <w...@mail.berlios.de> writes: > Am 11.10.2010 16:53, schrieb Markus Armbruster: >> Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Compiling with GCC 4.6.0 20100925 produced warnings: >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c: In function 'eepro100_read4': >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c:1351:14: error: 'val' may be used >>> uninitialized in this function [-Werror=uninitialized] >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c: In function 'eepro100_read2': >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c:1328:14: error: 'val' may be used >>> uninitialized in this function [-Werror=uninitialized] >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c: In function 'eepro100_read1': >>> /src/qemu/hw/eepro100.c:1285:13: error: 'val' may be used >>> uninitialized in this function [-Werror=uninitialized] >>> >>> Fix by initializing 'val' at start. >> >> I don't like sweeping bugs under the carpet like that. The initial >> value is used when and only when the emulation is buggy. We doubt it >> can happen. If we truly believe it can't happen, assert it. If we just >> doubt it, log it. > > Markus, that patch would only be an intermediate solution > which helps to fix a certain class of compiler warnings. > > I already promised to test the code with assertions > and started doing so (see my qemu repository > http://repo.or.cz/w/qemu/ar7.git/history/HEAD:/hw/eepro100.c). > Testing takes some time, so the intermediate solution > can be reasonable. > > But nothing will be swept under the carpet!
An intermediate solution could use a comment, but as long as you take care of the real solution, it's not that important.
