On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 09:15:20AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 09:37:47AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 09:29:03AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:

quoted

Hello Shawn,

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 03:52:20PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

  CC      drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.o

drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c: In function ?mxs_i2c_xfer?:
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c:196:6: warning: ?data? may be used
uninitialized in this function

Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <redacted>
---

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c

b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c index 7e78f7c..00f098f 100644

--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mxs.c

@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static int mxs_i2c_wait_for_data(struct

mxs_i2c_dev *i2c)

 static int mxs_i2c_finish_read(struct mxs_i2c_dev *i2c, u8 *buf,
 int len) {

-	u32 data;
+	u32 data = 0;

 	int i;
 	
 	for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {

Looks like a stupid compiler. Then better use

	u32 uninitialized_var(data);

Leave it as it is and fix the compiler? Will do another test later to
make sure.

Ben, do you have an opinion on this, leave it there or fix it?

Sorry, forgot the tests yesterday. I don't like random annotations
because of faulty compilers. Please fix that one. NACK from me.

Hi,

I hit this with emdebian gcc 4.6.1 ... I'd be for merging this u32 data = 0; 
stuff, so on my side it's ACK.

M