Re: [PATCH] silence spinlock/rwlock uninitialized break_lock memberwarnings

[Andrew Morton]

Jesper Juhl <juhl-lkml@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Any chance this patch could be added to -mm (and possibly mainline)?

Spose I can stick it in -mm.

> It removes a bunch of warnings when building with gcc -W, like these:
> include/linux/wait.h:82: warning: missing initializer
> include/linux/wait.h:82: warning: (near initialization for `(anonymous).break_lock')
> include/asm/rwsem.h:88: warning: missing initializer
> include/asm/rwsem.h:88: warning: (near initialization for `(anonymous).break_lock')
> so there's less to sift through when looking for real problems with this 
> patch applied. 
> I've been using it for a while with no ill effects.

But I'd rather not add a bunch of even-more-ifdefs to support a compiler
flag which we're not going to use.  It's easy enough for the `gcc -W' user
to add the patch himself.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/