On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 09:56:50AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 07/03/2012 11:58 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 02:34:21PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> From: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> > >> > >> This fixes: drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get': > >> drivers/pwm/core.c:534:15: warning: 'index' may be used > >> uninitialized in this function > >> > >> The addition to the if condition at end of the function isn't > >> strictly necessary to solve the warning, but does make it more > >> obvious that the initialization of "index" to a dummy value isn't > >> just hiding the problem. > > > > Actually this seems to be a false positive, and one that I don't > > see (I use GCC 4.6.3). index will be initialized when chip is set > > in the loop. My guess is that GCC 4.6.3 actually notices while your > > version doesn't. > > Yes, it is a false-positive, which is why I was fine with just > initializing the variable to hide the warning rather than making some > other code change. I think there's still value in hiding the warning > though, so that: > > a) Nobody else has to look at the warning and decide it's a false > positive and remember to ignore it. > > b) The fewer warnings there are, the more likely new warnings will be > noticed and analyzed. > > So I'd still argue for this change, or some other fix for the warning, > be merged.
Okay, I've applied a patch based on what you did, with a more explicit description of what's going on. Since I didn't see the warning with my toolchain before it would be good if you could retest and verify that it indeed fixes the problem for you. Thierry
pgplolSWXGVLQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature