[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53C79949.7010201@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:37:13 +0300
From: Boaz Harrosh <openosd@...il.com>
To: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
pramod.gurav.etc@...il.com, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Markus Mayer <markus.mayer@...aro.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: direct-io: squelch maybe-uninitialized warning in do_direct_IO()
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
The following warnings:
fs/direct-io.c: In function ‘__blockdev_direct_IO’:
fs/direct-io.c:1011:12: warning: ‘to’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
fs/direct-io.c:913:16: note: ‘to’ was declared here
fs/direct-io.c:1011:12: warning: ‘from’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
fs/direct-io.c:913:10: note: ‘from’ was declared here
are false positive because dio_get_page() either fails, or sets both
'from' and 'to'.
Maybe it's better to move initializing "to" and "from" out of
dio_get_page(). That _might_ make it easier for both the the reader and
the compiler to understand what's going on. Something like this:
Christoph Hellwig said ...
The fix of moving the code defintively looks nicer, while I think
uninitialized_var is horrible wart that won't get anywhere near my code.
Boaz Harrosh I agree with Christoph and Paul
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>
---
fs/direct-io.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/direct-io.c b/fs/direct-io.c
index 98040ba..2f024fc 100644
--- a/fs/direct-io.c
+++ b/fs/direct-io.c
@@ -198,9 +198,8 @@ static inline int dio_refill_pages(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio)
* L1 cache.
*/
static inline struct page *dio_get_page(struct dio *dio,
- struct dio_submit *sdio, size_t *from, size_t *to)
+ struct dio_submit *sdio)
{
- int n;
if (dio_pages_present(sdio) == 0) {
int ret;
@@ -209,10 +208,7 @@ static inline struct page *dio_get_page(struct dio *dio,
return ERR_PTR(ret);
BUG_ON(dio_pages_present(sdio) == 0);
}
- n = sdio->head++;
- *from = n ? 0 : sdio->from;
- *to = (n == sdio->tail - 1) ? sdio->to : PAGE_SIZE;
- return dio->pages[n];
+ return dio->pages[sdio->head];
}
/**
@@ -911,11 +907,15 @@ static int do_direct_IO(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio,
while (sdio->block_in_file < sdio->final_block_in_request) {
struct page *page;
size_t from, to;
- page = dio_get_page(dio, sdio, &from, &to);
+
+ page = dio_get_page(dio, sdio);
if (IS_ERR(page)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(page);
goto out;
}
+ from = sdio->head ? 0 : sdio->from;
+ to = (sdio->head == sdio->tail - 1) ? sdio->to : PAGE_SIZE;
+ sdio->head++;
while (from < to) {
unsigned this_chunk_bytes; /* # of bytes mapped */
--
1.9.3
--
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