qemu-trivial
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-logging: Fix -Werror=maybe-uninitialized warning


From: Robert Foley
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-logging: Fix -Werror=maybe-uninitialized warning
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:03:18 -0500

Good catch.
Reviewed-by: Robert Foley <address@hidden>

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 04:58, Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On 21/01/2020 10.28, address@hidden wrote:
> > From: Miroslav Rezanina <address@hidden>
> >
> > Checking for uninitialized variables raises warning for file path
> > variables in test_logfile_write and test_logfile_lock functions.
> >
> > To suppress this warning, initialize varibles to NULL. This is safe
> > change as result of g_build_filename is stored to them before any usage.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miroslav Rezanina <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  tests/test-logging.c | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/test-logging.c b/tests/test-logging.c
> > index 1e646f0..6387e49 100644
> > --- a/tests/test-logging.c
> > +++ b/tests/test-logging.c
> > @@ -114,8 +114,8 @@ static void test_logfile_write(gconstpointer data)
> >      QemuLogFile *logfile2;
> >      gchar const *dir = data;
> >      Error *err = NULL;
> > -    g_autofree gchar *file_path;
> > -    g_autofree gchar *file_path1;
> > +    g_autofree gchar *file_path = NULL;
> > +    g_autofree gchar *file_path1 = NULL;
> >      FILE *orig_fd;
> >
> >      /*
> > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static void test_logfile_lock(gconstpointer data)
> >      FILE *logfile;
> >      gchar const *dir = data;
> >      Error *err = NULL;
> > -    g_autofree gchar *file_path;
> > +    g_autofree gchar *file_path = NULL;
> >
> >      file_path = g_build_filename(dir, "qemu_test_logfile_lock0.log", NULL);
>
> Right. The glib documentation clearly states that "the variable must be
> initialized", see:
>
> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Miscellaneous-Macros.html#g-autofree
>
> So this is the right thing to do here!
>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
>



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]