On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerb...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 09:15:47PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Mika Westerberg
>> <mika.westerb...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
[]
>> > +static acpi_status pcihp_evaluate_rmv(acpi_handle handle, u32 lvl,
>> > + void *context, void
>> > **return_not_used)
>> > +{
>> > + unsigned long long *removable = context;
>> > + unsigned long long value;
>> > + acpi_status status;
>> > +
>> > + status = acpi_evaluate_integer(handle, "_RMV", NULL, &value);
>> > + if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status) && value) {
>>
>> So, there is a chance the caller gets back uninitialized *context.
>> Let's assume that is by design.
>>
>> > + *removable = value;
>> > + return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE;
>> > + }
>> > + return AE_OK;
>> > +}
>>
>>
>> > +static bool pcihp_is_removable(acpi_handle handle, size_t depth)
>> > +{
>> > + unsigned long long removable = 0;
>> > + acpi_status status;
>> > +
>> > + status = pcihp_evaluate_rmv(handle, 0, &removable, NULL);
>> > + if ((status == AE_CTRL_TERMINATE) && removable)
>>
>> Here you already have removable not equal zero.
>
> Hmm, removable is initialized to zero just few lines above... Did I miss
> something obvious?
Yes, that's correct, however, you already did this check when you call
evaluate_rmv. Thus, second check '&& removable' is not needed.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
