Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 2 Jun 2014 22:16:21 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8192u: r8192U_core.c: Cleaning up uninitialized variables | From | Rickard Strandqvist <> |
| |
Hi Dan!
Now this is a bad example because there is nothing really wrong, and I could not find the original error log :-(
But i get for the testing variable: drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 4747] : (style) Variable 'testing' is assigned a value that is never used.
And for the this file i now get:
drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 1014] : (style) Variable 'ret' is assigned a value that is never used. drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 1258] : (error) Possible null pointer dereference : dev drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 1411] : (style) Variable 'rate_config' is assigned a value that is never used. drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 1908] : (portability) 'oldaddr' is of type 'void *'. When using void pointers in calculations, the behaviour is undefined. drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 1959] : (style) Unused variable : i drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 2040] -> [drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U.h : 1129] : (style, inconclusive) The struct 'r8192_priv' hides a typedef with the same name. drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 2041] -> [drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c : 2048] : (warning) Possible null pointer dereference : priv - otherwise it is redundant to check it against null.
But why not test yourself, see:
http://cppcheck.sourceforge.net/
Appropriate arguments to start with are: cppcheck --force --quiet --enable=all drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
Best regards Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-02 9:39 GMT+02:00 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>: > On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 11:05:39PM +0200, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: >> Hi Dan >> >> I agree, this looks strange. >> Have been looking for a while in history with, to see if the code has >> been removed. I start my search using cppcheck for over three months >> ago. >> But could not find anything. Sorry about that :-( >> >> But I'll make a patch that completely removes testing variable then instead? > > Yes. Btw, what do the cppcheck error messages for this look like > anyway? > > regards, > dan carpenter >
| |