On 5 August 2013 18:59, Mark Brown <broo...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 06:42:33PM +0800, Andy Green wrote:
>> On 5 August 2013 18:16, Mark Brown <broo...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>> > There may be other stuff lurking in linux-linaro that I'm not aware of,
>> > everything is supposed to be individually selected for backport.
>
>> Literally linux-linaro I'm not sure is useful for anything, the tree
>> LTs are basing on is linux-linaro-core-tracking.
>
>> It's composed by rebase and then merges, so it's easy to see what's in
>> there from a quick git log.
>
> That doesn't help with understanding why any of it is there or what it's
> for.
Andrey is here hopefully he can do a Tixy-style breakdown.
>> Sounds reasonable.... attached is our current patch for your
>> consideration. There's a permanent #warning about an unwind tables
>> TODO this also knocks out the others are actual problems.
>
> Please split this up into proper patches, and of course you should be
> submitting any fixes upstream if they're still present - if you're doing
> this sort of warning cleanup work it's going to be useful upstream too.
> I had a quick glance through and:
These are only applied on lsk and llct, I don't actually know where
the code patched came from but I think they're all mainline. I'll
check it out later.
> - Things like just assigning a value to variables at declaration are
> worrying since that just shuts up the flow analysis warnings even if
> they're actually pointing out a genuine missed code path.
In this case it's okay, that var is written via a pointer arg to
another call, but the call either returns an err or fills it in. The
value is only used on non-error path. It's just keeping the compiler
happy.
> - The regmap change isn't something that I've seen upstream...
If you mean where did the original come from
commit 5a08d15602987bbdff3407d7645f95b7a70f1a6f
Author: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed Mar 20 17:02:02 2013 -0600
regmap: don't corrupt work buffer in _regmap_raw_write()
> - For printf() warnings consider changing the printf() format specifier
> to be accurate rather than casting.
Yes fair enough.
-Andy
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
