On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:55:13AM +0800, Zhao Lei wrote: > > AFAICS the codepath that would use uninitialized value of count is not > > reachable: > > > > add_to_ctl = true > > > > 270 if (info->offset > root->ino_cache_progress) > > 271 add_to_ctl = false; > > 272 else if (info->offset + info->bytes > > > root->ino_cache_progress) > > 273 count = root->ino_cache_progress - > > info->offset + 1; > > 274 else > > 275 count = info->bytes; > > 276 > > 277 rb_erase(&info->offset_index, rbroot); > > 278 spin_unlock(rbroot_lock); > > 279 if (add_to_ctl) > > 280 __btrfs_add_free_space(ctl, info->offset, > > count); > > > > count is defined iff add_to_ctl == true, so the patch is not necessary. And I'm > > not quite sure that 0 passed down to __btrfs_add_free_space as 'bytes' makes > > sense at all. > > Agree above all. > > So I write following description in changelog: > "Not real problem, just avoid warning of: ..." > > It is just to avoid complier warning, no function changed. > A warning in compiler output is not pretty:) And the compiler is wrong in this case, the code is fine as is. I'd say go fix you compiler and the output will be pretty :) No really, this kind of fixes brings false sense of "fixing something in the code". -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
