| Message ID | 1362404600.16460.26.camel@x61.thuisdomein (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c b/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c index 92afeb2..79b31ae 100644 --- a/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c +++ b/drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c @@ -68,13 +68,13 @@ static inline int m920x_write_seq(struct usb_device *udev, u8 request, struct m920x_inits *seq) { int ret; - while (seq->address) { + do { ret = m920x_write(udev, request, seq->data, seq->address); if (ret != 0) return ret; seq++; - } + } while (seq->address); return ret; }
Since commit 7543f344e9b06afe86b55a2620f5c11b38bd5642 ("[media] m920x: factor out a m920x_write_seq() function") building m920x.o triggers this GCC warning: drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c: In function ‘m920x_probe’: drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c:91:6: warning: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized] This warning is caused by m920x_write_seq(), which is apparently inlined into m920x_probe(). It is clear why GCC thinks 'ret' may be used uninitialized. But in practice the first seq->address will always be non-zero when this function is called. That means we can change the while()-do{} loop into a do{}-while() loop. And that suffices to make GCC see that 'ret' will not be used uninitialized. Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> --- Compile tested only! drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb/m920x.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)