linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: v4l-dvb tree build warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1001271010580.16311@banach.math.auburn.edu>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:25:07 -0600 (CST)
From:	Theodore Kilgore <kilgota@...ach.math.auburn.edu>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
cc:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: v4l-dvb tree build warning



On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
>
> Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) produced this warning:
>
> drivers/media/video/gspca/sq905c.c: In function 'sd_config':
> drivers/media/video/gspca/sq905c.c:207: warning: unused variable 'i'
>
> Introduced by commit 6436e86d8920520f6650bedaa816ed596c7c30b7 ("V4L/DVB
> (14006): gscpa_sq905c: Better detection of CIF resolution cameras").
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
>

Hmmm. Indeed this is there. The reason I have been saying that it can't be 
there is, my local copy of sq905c.c had at lines


/* This function is called at probe time just before sd_init */
static int sd_config(struct gspca_dev *gspca_dev,
 		const struct usb_device_id *id)
{
 	struct cam *cam = &gspca_dev->cam;
 	struct sd *dev = (struct sd *) gspca_dev; (here is line 207)
 	int ret;

But, having just done a pull, I have now a file which agrees with the tree 
of Hans de Goede, and it says in it

/* This function is called at probe time just before sd_init */
static int sd_config(struct gspca_dev *gspca_dev,
 		const struct usb_device_id *id)
{
 	struct cam *cam = &gspca_dev->cam;
 	struct sd *dev = (struct sd *) gspca_dev;
 	int i, ret;				  (here is line 207)

Amazing, and I have at this point no idea how it got in there. Again, it 
is not present in the copy I have been staring at for the last several 
days, every time that this issue has come up.

(me scratches head)

Definitely, the declaration of "i" has to come out because it is true it 
is not used.

Hans, what is the quickest and most efficient way to get this fixed? I 
suspect people are in a hurry.


Theodore Kilgore
--
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/