| Message ID | 20190322143725.1332353-1-arnd@arndb.de |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | d825db346270dbceef83b7b750dbc29f1d7dcc0e |
| Headers | show |
| Series | b43: shut up clang -Wuninitialized variable warning | expand |
On 3/22/19 9:37 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Clang warns about what is clearly a case of passing an uninitalized > variable into a static function: > > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1852:23: error: variable 'gains' is uninitialized when used here > [-Werror,-Wuninitialized] > lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); > ^~~~~ > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1838:2: note: variable 'gains' is declared here > struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; > ^ > 1 error generated. > > However, this function is empty, and its arguments are never evaluated, > so gcc in contrast does not warn here. Both compilers behave in a > reasonable way as far as I can tell, so we should change the code > to avoid the warning everywhere. > > We could just eliminate the lpphy_papd_cal() function entirely, > given that it has had the TODO comment in it for 10 years now > and is rather unlikely to ever get done. I'm doing a simpler > change here, and just pass the 'oldgains' variable in that has > been initialized, based on the guess that this is what was > originally meant. > > Fixes: 2c0d6100da3e ("b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > index 46408a560814..aedee026c5e2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > @@ -1835,7 +1835,7 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, > static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) > { > struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp; > - struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; > + struct lpphy_tx_gains oldgains; > int old_txpctl, old_afe_ovr, old_rf, old_bbmult; > > lpphy_read_tx_pctl_mode_from_hardware(dev); > @@ -1849,9 +1849,9 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) > lpphy_set_tx_power_control(dev, B43_LPPHY_TXPCTL_OFF); > > if (dev->dev->chip_id == 0x4325 && dev->dev->chip_rev == 0) > - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); > + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 30); > else > - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 65); > + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 65); > > if (old_afe_ovr) > lpphy_set_tx_gains(dev, oldgains); > Acked-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> Thanks. I will submit a patch that removes lpphy_papd_cal(). You are correct that it is unlikely ever to be implemented. Larry
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 03:37:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Clang warns about what is clearly a case of passing an uninitalized > variable into a static function: > > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1852:23: error: variable 'gains' is uninitialized when used here > [-Werror,-Wuninitialized] > lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); > ^~~~~ > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1838:2: note: variable 'gains' is declared here > struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; > ^ > 1 error generated. > > However, this function is empty, and its arguments are never evaluated, > so gcc in contrast does not warn here. Both compilers behave in a > reasonable way as far as I can tell, so we should change the code > to avoid the warning everywhere. > > We could just eliminate the lpphy_papd_cal() function entirely, > given that it has had the TODO comment in it for 10 years now > and is rather unlikely to ever get done. I'm doing a simpler > change here, and just pass the 'oldgains' variable in that has > been initialized, based on the guess that this is what was > originally meant. > > Fixes: 2c0d6100da3e ("b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > index 46408a560814..aedee026c5e2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c > @@ -1835,7 +1835,7 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, > static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) > { > struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp; > - struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; > + struct lpphy_tx_gains oldgains; > int old_txpctl, old_afe_ovr, old_rf, old_bbmult; > > lpphy_read_tx_pctl_mode_from_hardware(dev); > @@ -1849,9 +1849,9 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) > lpphy_set_tx_power_control(dev, B43_LPPHY_TXPCTL_OFF); > > if (dev->dev->chip_id == 0x4325 && dev->dev->chip_rev == 0) > - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); > + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 30); > else > - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 65); > + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 65); > > if (old_afe_ovr) > lpphy_set_tx_gains(dev, oldgains); > -- > 2.20.0 >
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > Clang warns about what is clearly a case of passing an uninitalized > variable into a static function: > > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1852:23: error: variable 'gains' is uninitialized when used here > [-Werror,-Wuninitialized] > lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); > ^~~~~ > drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1838:2: note: variable 'gains' is declared here > struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; > ^ > 1 error generated. > > However, this function is empty, and its arguments are never evaluated, > so gcc in contrast does not warn here. Both compilers behave in a > reasonable way as far as I can tell, so we should change the code > to avoid the warning everywhere. > > We could just eliminate the lpphy_papd_cal() function entirely, > given that it has had the TODO comment in it for 10 years now > and is rather unlikely to ever get done. I'm doing a simpler > change here, and just pass the 'oldgains' variable in that has > been initialized, based on the guess that this is what was > originally meant. > > Fixes: 2c0d6100da3e ("b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > Acked-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> > Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com> Patch applied to wireless-drivers-next.git, thanks. d825db346270 b43: shut up clang -Wuninitialized variable warning -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10865933/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c index 46408a560814..aedee026c5e2 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c @@ -1835,7 +1835,7 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) { struct b43_phy_lp *lpphy = dev->phy.lp; - struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; + struct lpphy_tx_gains oldgains; int old_txpctl, old_afe_ovr, old_rf, old_bbmult; lpphy_read_tx_pctl_mode_from_hardware(dev); @@ -1849,9 +1849,9 @@ static void lpphy_papd_cal_txpwr(struct b43_wldev *dev) lpphy_set_tx_power_control(dev, B43_LPPHY_TXPCTL_OFF); if (dev->dev->chip_id == 0x4325 && dev->dev->chip_rev == 0) - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 30); else - lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 65); + lpphy_papd_cal(dev, oldgains, 0, 1, 65); if (old_afe_ovr) lpphy_set_tx_gains(dev, oldgains);
Clang warns about what is clearly a case of passing an uninitalized variable into a static function: drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1852:23: error: variable 'gains' is uninitialized when used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized] lpphy_papd_cal(dev, gains, 0, 1, 30); ^~~~~ drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c:1838:2: note: variable 'gains' is declared here struct lpphy_tx_gains gains, oldgains; ^ 1 error generated. However, this function is empty, and its arguments are never evaluated, so gcc in contrast does not warn here. Both compilers behave in a reasonable way as far as I can tell, so we should change the code to avoid the warning everywhere. We could just eliminate the lpphy_papd_cal() function entirely, given that it has had the TODO comment in it for 10 years now and is rather unlikely to ever get done. I'm doing a simpler change here, and just pass the 'oldgains' variable in that has been initialized, based on the guess that this is what was originally meant. Fixes: 2c0d6100da3e ("b43: LP-PHY: Begin implementing calibration & software RFKILL support") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_lp.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) -- 2.20.0