Re: [2.6.29-rc2-git2] compilation warnings

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:

> At Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:46:28 +0100,
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:32:17 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:15:29 +0100,
> > > Rufus & Azrael wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Here are my compilation warnings for fresh 2.6.29-rc2-git2 kernel :
> > > > 
> > > > > sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.c: In function ‘get_empty_pcm_device’:
> > > > > sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.c:2544: attention : ‘dev’ may be used 
> > > > > uninitialized in this function
> > > 
> > > A bogus warning.  Ignore this.
> > 
> > No matter how bogus it is, it should be fixed. Otherwise this is 
> > wasting the time of users and developers over and over again.
> 
> Well, it's a bug of gcc appearing only in a certain version, so most 
> people won't see it.
> 
> Of course, we can put uninitialized_var().  But, I don't basically like 
> adding it unconditionally...

People will again and again look at this warning and waste time deciding 
that "it's a bogus warning" or even report it. As time goes on does the 
human cost get larger, linearly.

Furthermore, if everyone in the kernel behaves like that we'll literally 
have dozens (even hundreds) of build warnings that might be bogus but 
which also obscure other, real warnings by their sheer mass.

The cost of you adding a oneliner annotation is miniscule compared to that 
and it is a one-time effort. We already spent more energy on discussing 
this than it would have taken you to annotate it. Please.

	Ingo