[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081220100228.GB24181@dirshya.in.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:32:28 +0530
From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
mingo@...e.hu, dipankar@...ibm.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ego@...ibm.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
davecb@....com, tconnors@...ro.swin.edu.au, maxk@...lcomm.com,
gregory.haskins@...il.com, pavel@...e.cz,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/8] sched: nominate preferred wakeup cpu
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> [2008-12-19 20:44:55]:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:06:38 +0530 Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > kernel/sched.c: In function 'schedule':
> > > kernel/sched.c:3679: warning: 'active_balance' may be used uninitialized in this function
> > >
> > > This warning is correct - the code is buggy.
> >
> > Yes this is my code bug. I did not see the warning in sched.c. Is
> > there any build option that I need to pass in order to get -Wall
> > effect?
>
> That was just with plain old kbuild: `make allmodconfig;make'.
>
> That warning was produced by gcc-4.0.2. If you're using something more
> recent then gcc has regressed.
This is an interesting problem. I am unable to get that warning in the
following GCC versions even with a combination of the following
cmdline options: -Wall -Wextra -Wuninitialized
gcc version 4.1.2 20070502
gcc version 4.2.3
I will look for older gcc and check this out.
--Vaidy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists