src/call-forwarding.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/call-forwarding.c b/src/call-forwarding.c index 512f223..36ba4f1 100644 --- a/src/call-forwarding.c +++ b/src/call-forwarding.c @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static gboolean is_cfu_enabled(struct ofono_call_forwarding *cf, static void sim_set_cf_indicator(struct ofono_call_forwarding *cf) { gboolean cfu_voice; - struct ofono_call_forwarding_condition *cond; + struct ofono_call_forwarding_condition *cond = NULL; cfu_voice = is_cfu_enabled(cf, &cond);

> > src/call-forwarding.c | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/src/call-forwarding.c b/src/call-forwarding.c > > index 512f223..36ba4f1 100644 > > --- a/src/call-forwarding.c > > +++ b/src/call-forwarding.c > > @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static gboolean is_cfu_enabled(struct > ofono_call_forwarding *cf, > > static void sim_set_cf_indicator(struct ofono_call_forwarding *cf) > > { > > gboolean cfu_voice; > > - struct ofono_call_forwarding_condition *cond; > > + struct ofono_call_forwarding_condition *cond = NULL; > > > > cfu_voice = is_cfu_enabled(cf, &cond); > > I really hate trying to fix compiler warnings like this. > > /* > * For now we only support Voice, although Fax & all Data > * basic services are applicable as well. > */ > for (; l; l = l->next) { > cond = l->data; > > if (cond->cls > BEARER_CLASS_VOICE) > continue; > > if (out) > *out = cond; > > return TRUE; > } > > return FALSE; > > So this is clearly a false positive. The only why this would fail is This is not a false positive, it is quite possible not to reach the "for(;;)" branch, and uninitialized the *cond. I have added *out = NULL; Out of the branch, and found that the warning gone. So here I think gcc is right, and we need the patch.