On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 11:15:26 +0100 Marek Belisko wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Marek Belisko <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/staging/ft1000/ft1000-usb/ft1000_usb.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
a. always include the warning or error message that the patch fixes
b. (quoting from another email yesterday:)
so in your analysis of this compiler warning, was the warning correct &
justified,
or was it false? I.e., is the init to NULL needed?
If it was false, could we just silence the warning by using:
struct ft1000_info *unitialized_var(pft1000info);
plus #include <linux/compiler.h> ?
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ft1000/ft1000-usb/ft1000_usb.c
> b/drivers/staging/ft1000/ft1000-usb/ft1000_usb.c
> index 99e3339..b7c4602 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/ft1000/ft1000-usb/ft1000_usb.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/ft1000/ft1000-usb/ft1000_usb.c
> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static int ft1000_probe(struct usb_interface *interface,
> int i, ret = 0, size;
>
> struct ft1000_device *ft1000dev;
> - struct ft1000_info *pft1000info;
> + struct ft1000_info *pft1000info = NULL;
> const struct firmware *dsp_fw;
>
> ft1000dev = kmalloc(sizeof(struct ft1000_device), GFP_KERNEL);
> --
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
