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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:12:41 -0700 From: "Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com> To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> 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 06/18/2010 01:46 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > 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. > that's what is confusing..(not being used, but is being used, but gcc says it's not used..) :-) >> 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. > o.k. I admit I looked at other printk's in this file to get an idea of what I might do.. saw PCI%d and figured it would print "PCI: re-enabling device" but didnt think it was an error... reason for putting KERN_DEBUG. here is what the new patch looks like: From f910375438be06497d0524bff146c26cafca272b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@...il.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:08:37 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] setup-pci_test Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@...il.com> --- drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c index 66cb8f4..2ab5f1e 100644 --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c @@ -919,6 +919,9 @@ again: enable_all: retval = pci_reenable_device(bridge); + if (retval) { + dev_err(&bridge->dev, "failed to re-enable device: %d\n", retval); + } pci_set_master(bridge); pci_enable_bridges(parent); } -- 1.7.1.rc1.21.gf3bd6 should I have put if (!retval) instead should I put "failed to re-enable bridge device" is there an exit code needed? if not and all is good then I can resend this out.. Justin P. Mattock -- 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