| Message ID | 1453736756-1959377-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Monday, January 25, 2016 10:07:20 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 25-01-16, 16:45, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > gcc warns quite a bit about values returned from allocate_resources() > > in cpufreq-dt.c: > > > > cpufreq-dt.c: In function 'cpufreq_init': > > cpufreq-dt.c:327:6: error: 'cpu_dev' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > cpufreq-dt.c:197:17: note: 'cpu_dev' was declared here > > cpufreq-dt.c:376:2: error: 'cpu_clk' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > cpufreq-dt.c:199:14: note: 'cpu_clk' was declared here > > cpufreq-dt.c: In function 'dt_cpufreq_probe': > > cpufreq-dt.c:461:2: error: 'cpu_clk' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > cpufreq-dt.c:447:14: note: 'cpu_clk' was declared here > > > > The problem is that it's slightly hard for gcc to follow return > > codes across PTR_ERR() calls. > > This patch uses explicit assignments to the "ret" variable to make > > it easier for gcc to verify that the code is actually correct, > > without the need to add a bogus initialization. > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 15 +++++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c > > index 9bc37c437874..0ca74d070058 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c > > @@ -142,15 +142,16 @@ static int allocate_resources(int cpu, struct device **cdev, > > > > try_again: > > cpu_reg = regulator_get_optional(cpu_dev, reg); > > - if (IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) { > > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(cpu_reg); > > + if (ret) { > > /* > > * If cpu's regulator supply node is present, but regulator is > > * not yet registered, we should try defering probe. > > */ > > - if (PTR_ERR(cpu_reg) == -EPROBE_DEFER) { > > + if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) { > > dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "cpu%d regulator not ready, retry\n", > > cpu); > > - return -EPROBE_DEFER; > > + return ret; > > } > > > > /* Try with "cpu-supply" */ > > @@ -159,18 +160,16 @@ try_again: > > goto try_again; > > } > > > > - dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "no regulator for cpu%d: %ld\n", > > - cpu, PTR_ERR(cpu_reg)); > > + dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "no regulator for cpu%d: %d\n", cpu, ret); > > } > > > > cpu_clk = clk_get(cpu_dev, NULL); > > - if (IS_ERR(cpu_clk)) { > > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(cpu_clk); > > + if (ret) { > > /* put regulator */ > > if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) > > regulator_put(cpu_reg); > > > > - ret = PTR_ERR(cpu_clk); > > - > > /* > > * If cpu's clk node is present, but clock is not yet > > * registered, we should try defering probe. > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Applied, thanks! Rafael
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c index 9bc37c437874..0ca74d070058 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c @@ -142,15 +142,16 @@ static int allocate_resources(int cpu, struct device **cdev, try_again: cpu_reg = regulator_get_optional(cpu_dev, reg); - if (IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) { + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(cpu_reg); + if (ret) { /* * If cpu's regulator supply node is present, but regulator is * not yet registered, we should try defering probe. */ - if (PTR_ERR(cpu_reg) == -EPROBE_DEFER) { + if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) { dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "cpu%d regulator not ready, retry\n", cpu); - return -EPROBE_DEFER; + return ret; } /* Try with "cpu-supply" */ @@ -159,18 +160,16 @@ try_again: goto try_again; } - dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "no regulator for cpu%d: %ld\n", - cpu, PTR_ERR(cpu_reg)); + dev_dbg(cpu_dev, "no regulator for cpu%d: %d\n", cpu, ret); } cpu_clk = clk_get(cpu_dev, NULL); - if (IS_ERR(cpu_clk)) { + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(cpu_clk); + if (ret) { /* put regulator */ if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) regulator_put(cpu_reg); - ret = PTR_ERR(cpu_clk); - /* * If cpu's clk node is present, but clock is not yet * registered, we should try defering probe.
gcc warns quite a bit about values returned from allocate_resources() in cpufreq-dt.c: cpufreq-dt.c: In function 'cpufreq_init': cpufreq-dt.c:327:6: error: 'cpu_dev' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] cpufreq-dt.c:197:17: note: 'cpu_dev' was declared here cpufreq-dt.c:376:2: error: 'cpu_clk' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] cpufreq-dt.c:199:14: note: 'cpu_clk' was declared here cpufreq-dt.c: In function 'dt_cpufreq_probe': cpufreq-dt.c:461:2: error: 'cpu_clk' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] cpufreq-dt.c:447:14: note: 'cpu_clk' was declared here The problem is that it's slightly hard for gcc to follow return codes across PTR_ERR() calls. This patch uses explicit assignments to the "ret" variable to make it easier for gcc to verify that the code is actually correct, without the need to add a bogus initialization. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 15 +++++++-------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) -- 2.7.0