summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/drivers
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorArnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>2015-01-28 16:00:11 +0100
committerCorey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>2015-02-19 20:58:18 -0600
commit191cc41405188780e5f8f3c90d84a1e747d962e9 (patch)
treeddc2a596ae5f6abfe58271ffec0417f40685f05c /drivers
parent48862ea2ce86370b708614506d93f07ed09b066f (diff)
downloadlinux-191cc41405188780e5f8f3c90d84a1e747d962e9.tar.bz2
ipmi: avoid gcc warning
A new harmless warning has come up on ARM builds with gcc-4.9: drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c: In function 'smi_send.isra.11': include/linux/spinlock.h:372:95: warning: 'flags' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->rlock, flags); ^ drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c:1490:16: note: 'flags' was declared here unsigned long flags; ^ This could be worked around by initializing the 'flags' variable, but it seems better to rework the code to avoid this. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Fixes: 7ea0ed2b5be81 ("ipmi: Make the message handler easier to use for SMI interfaces") Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers')
-rw-r--r--drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c29
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 8 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
index ab595410169d..4891c39b3259 100644
--- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
+++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
@@ -1483,14 +1483,10 @@ static inline void format_lan_msg(struct ipmi_smi_msg *smi_msg,
smi_msg->msgid = msgid;
}
-static void smi_send(ipmi_smi_t intf, struct ipmi_smi_handlers *handlers,
- struct ipmi_smi_msg *smi_msg, int priority)
+static struct ipmi_smi_msg *smi_add_send_msg(ipmi_smi_t intf,
+ struct ipmi_smi_msg *smi_msg,
+ int priority)
{
- int run_to_completion = intf->run_to_completion;
- unsigned long flags;
-
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
if (intf->curr_msg) {
if (priority > 0)
list_add_tail(&smi_msg->link, &intf->hp_xmit_msgs);
@@ -1500,8 +1496,25 @@ static void smi_send(ipmi_smi_t intf, struct ipmi_smi_handlers *handlers,
} else {
intf->curr_msg = smi_msg;
}
- if (!run_to_completion)
+
+ return smi_msg;
+}
+
+
+static void smi_send(ipmi_smi_t intf, struct ipmi_smi_handlers *handlers,
+ struct ipmi_smi_msg *smi_msg, int priority)
+{
+ int run_to_completion = intf->run_to_completion;
+
+ if (run_to_completion) {
+ smi_msg = smi_add_send_msg(intf, smi_msg, priority);
+ } else {
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ smi_msg = smi_add_send_msg(intf, smi_msg, priority);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ }
if (smi_msg)
handlers->sender(intf->send_info, smi_msg);