On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Jason Gunthorpe <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:26:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> With gcc-4.1.2: >>> >>> drivers/infiniband/core/iwpm_util.c: In function ‘iwpm_send_mapinfo’: >>> drivers/infiniband/core/iwpm_util.c:647: warning: ‘ret’ may be used >>> uninitialized in this function >>> >>> Indeed, if nl_client is not found in any of the scanned has buckets, ret >>> will be used uninitialized. >>> >>> Preinitialize ret to zero to fix this. >> >> Did we come to a conclusion if we should apply this to the RMDA tree? The >> patch was marked RFC.. > > So far no one commented on what's the correct behavior in case of failure, > which was the actual reason for the RFC.
As I said above, I think initializing to -EINVAL would be better than 0 here, but initializing 'ret' at declaration time is appropriate here (though I normally try to avoid doing so, see https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=232) Arnd
