Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 149462 - missing return statement
missing return statement
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: configure-thinkpad (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity low
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jason Carpenter
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
: MoveUpstream
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-02-23 06:40 EST by David Binderman
Modified: 2008-02-06 18:55 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2008-02-06 18:55:09 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description David Binderman 2005-02-23 06:40:36 EST
Description of problem:

I just tried to compile package configure-thinkpad-0.9-1 from 
Redhat Fedora Extras development tree.

The compiler said

callbacks.c(536): warning #1011: missing return statement at end of
non-void function "to_timer"

The source code is

static int to_timer(int power_mode, int battery_p) {
    switch (power_mode) {
    case 0: return(TIMER_HIGH);
    case 1: return(TIMER_AUTO);
    case 2: if (battery_p) {
      } else {

Suggest add code to deal with the case where power_mode is < 0, or > 2.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
Actual results:

Expected results:

Additional info:
Comment 1 Ville Skyttä 2005-02-23 14:55:14 EST
Bug report forwarded upstream to (wang02139 at gmail.com), asking him
what's the proper way to fix this.
Comment 2 Michael Schwendt 2005-02-23 17:42:52 EST
After a brief look at the code, I'd say a fix would be purely
cosmetical as it would only please the compiler. If function
to_timer(..) is never called with a first argument outside [0,1,2],
the function need not have a catch-all rule. If it were ever called
with an arg outside [0,1,2], that would be a bug somewhere else.

Some programmers like to shut up compilers and get rid of all
warnings, others do not.
Comment 3 David Binderman 2005-02-24 04:56:27 EST
>If it were ever called
>with an arg outside [0,1,2], that would be a bug somewhere else.

By adding code to the function to detect arguments with bad values,
you make the function more robust.

Certainly, silently returning rubbish to the caller is a dangerous
Comment 4 Michael Schwendt 2005-02-24 05:46:46 EST
> By adding code to the function to detect arguments with bad values,
> you make the function more robust.

No, you refer to the purely theoretical scenario that the function
would actually be called with an argument outside its well-defined
domain. If that happened, that would be unexpected/undefined
behaviour. Would the change in the function be semantically correct?
To return a good value for illegal input?  Simply altering the
function's domain doesn't make anything more robust. Just read the
source code and notice where the programmer has placed related
assertions during development.

I don't refer to the general case of catch-all rules or default
statements as necessary for a well-defined range of return-values, I
refer to this particular program.
Comment 5 Christian Iseli 2007-01-19 18:45:56 EST
FC3 and FC4 have now been EOL'd.

Please check the ticket against a current Fedora release, and either adjust the
release number, or close it if appropriate.


Your friendly BZ janitor :-)
Comment 6 petrosyan 2008-02-06 18:55:09 EST
Fedora Core 3 is not maintained anymore.

Setting status to "INSUFFICIENT_DATA". If you can reproduce this bug in the
current Fedora release please reopen this bug and assign it to the corresponding
Fedora version.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.