[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXJs=+SpB07t0a+LRWX_TGUnUmQi3P-aExFzmbm_j0fow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:50:06 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: isubramanian@....com, kchudgar@....com,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers: net: xgene: Rewrite loop in xgene_enet_ecc_init()
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:34 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:39:41 +0200
>
>> drivers/net/ethernet/apm/xgene/xgene_enet_sgmac.c: In function ‘xgene_enet_ecc_init’:
>> drivers/net/ethernet/apm/xgene/xgene_enet_sgmac.c:126: warning: ‘data’ may be used uninitialized in this function
>>
>> Depending on the arbitrary value on the stack, the loop may terminate
>> too early, and cause a bogus -ENODEV failure.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
>> ---
>> v2: Rewrite the loop instead of pre-initializing data.
>
> I hate to be a pest, but like the other patch of your's I think
> a do { } while() works best here because the intent is clearly
> to run the loop at least once, right?
I wanted to avoid checking for "data != ~0U" twice: once to abort the loop,
and once to check if a timeout happened.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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