[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100618134622.7db9f913@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:46:22 -0700
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: "Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5]pci:setup_bus.c Fix warning: variable 'retval' set
but not used
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:26:32 -0700
"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com> wrote:
> On 06/18/2010 01:05 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:59:32 -0700
> > "Justin P. Mattock"<justinmattock@...il.com> wrote:
> >> just added this in(as a test), and the retval warning still shows up.
> >> with the last post I just added a printk was that legit, and if so what
> >> else might be added to it to make it complete and proper?
> >
> > What's the full warning? Seems like printing the value should have
> > been enough to shut up gcc...
> >
>
> this is the warning messg after applying yinghai's patch:
>
> CC drivers/pci/setup-bus.o
> drivers/pci/setup-bus.c: In function
> 'pci_assign_unassigned_bridge_resources':
> drivers/pci/setup-bus.c:868:6: warning: variable 'retval' set but not used
Right because Yinghai's patch just sets retval but doesn't actually use
it anywhere.
> if I add a printk then gcc is content.. patch below, but not the best at
> creating printk's(the whole % thing messes me up) but here goes:
>
> From 48e15b87072c6b4286d943c55bfe2ae26d358795 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@...il.com>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:23:27 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH 4/4] bus.c_add_print
> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@...il.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> index 66cb8f4..806b766 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> @@ -919,6 +919,7 @@ again:
>
> enable_all:
> retval = pci_reenable_device(bridge);
> + printk(KERN_DEBUG "PCI%d: re-enabling device\n", retval);
> pci_set_master(bridge);
> pci_enable_bridges(parent);
> }
Again, this doesn't have the if (retval) condition around the printk; I
don't want to see this message everytime regardless. Also the message
is misleading, it should be something like:
dev_err(&bridge->dev, "failed to re-enable device: %d\n", retval)
instead. PCI%d makes it look like we're talking about a specific bus
or something and not an error code.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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