On 03/04/2019 10:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 03.04.19 at 11:06, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 03/04/2019 09:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 02.04.19 at 21:57, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/sysctl.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/sysctl.c
>>>> @@ -137,27 +137,35 @@ long arch_do_sysctl(
>>>> case XEN_SYSCTL_cpu_hotplug:
>>>> {
>>>> unsigned int cpu = sysctl->u.cpu_hotplug.cpu;
>>>> + bool plug;
>>>> + long (*fn)(void *) = NULL;
>>>> + void *hcpu = NULL;
>>> May I ask that you consistently initialize (or not) all three new
>>> variables you introduce?
>> I noticed this while posting. Not would allow the compiler to notice
>> when fn wasn't selected, but hvcpu is going to end up with an
>> initialiser by the next patch.
> Right, I've noticed the need for hcpu to stay as is while looking at
> patch 3. Before you remove the other initializer, though - are you
> sure you don't need to instead add one, for older gcc to not choke?
CI is happy
https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/pipelines/55211926
(This is specifically why I added the CentOS 6 build)
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
