Message ID | 1510831373-31768-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org |
---|---|
State | Awaiting Upstream, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
Series | net/smc: Fix preinitialization of buf_desc in __smc_buf_create() | expand |
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > With gcc-4.1.2: > > net/smc/smc_core.c: In function ‘__smc_buf_create’: > net/smc/smc_core.c:567: warning: ‘bufsize’ may be used uninitialized in this function > > Indeed, if the for-loop is never executed, bufsize is used > uninitialized. In addition, buf_desc is stored for later use, while it > is still a NULL pointer. > > Before, error handling was done by checking if buf_desc is non-NULL. > The cleanup changed this to an error check, but forgot to update the > preinitialization of buf_desc to an error pointer. > > Update the preinitializatin of buf_desc to fix this. > > Fixes: b33982c3a6838d13 ("net/smc: cleanup function __smc_buf_create()") > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> > --- > I don't know if this can ever happen, but the old code handled it. Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> This one I could reproduce with gcc-4.1 on x86, but not gcc-4.2 or higher.
On 11/16/2017 12:22 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > With gcc-4.1.2: > > net/smc/smc_core.c: In function ‘__smc_buf_create’: > net/smc/smc_core.c:567: warning: ‘bufsize’ may be used uninitialized in this function > > Indeed, if the for-loop is never executed, bufsize is used > uninitialized. In addition, buf_desc is stored for later use, while it > is still a NULL pointer. > > Before, error handling was done by checking if buf_desc is non-NULL. > The cleanup changed this to an error check, but forgot to update the > preinitialization of buf_desc to an error pointer. > > Update the preinitializatin of buf_desc to fix this. > > Fixes: b33982c3a6838d13 ("net/smc: cleanup function __smc_buf_create()") > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> > --- > I don't know if this can ever happen, but the old code handled it. The for-loop is at least executed once; thus there is no real problem. Nevertheless the warning is ugly, and the current initialization with NULL meaningless after the smc_buf cleanup. Therefore I add your patch to my list of coming smc patches. Thanks! > --- > net/smc/smc_core.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_core.c b/net/smc/smc_core.c > index 2578fbd95664af84..453c54467082d93f 100644 > --- a/net/smc/smc_core.c > +++ b/net/smc/smc_core.c > @@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ static int __smc_buf_create(struct smc_sock *smc, bool is_rmb) > { > struct smc_connection *conn = &smc->conn; > struct smc_link_group *lgr = conn->lgr; > - struct smc_buf_desc *buf_desc = NULL; > + struct smc_buf_desc *buf_desc = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > struct list_head *buf_list; > int bufsize, bufsize_short; > int sk_buf_size; >
diff --git a/net/smc/smc_core.c b/net/smc/smc_core.c index 2578fbd95664af84..453c54467082d93f 100644 --- a/net/smc/smc_core.c +++ b/net/smc/smc_core.c @@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ static int __smc_buf_create(struct smc_sock *smc, bool is_rmb) { struct smc_connection *conn = &smc->conn; struct smc_link_group *lgr = conn->lgr; - struct smc_buf_desc *buf_desc = NULL; + struct smc_buf_desc *buf_desc = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); struct list_head *buf_list; int bufsize, bufsize_short; int sk_buf_size;
With gcc-4.1.2: net/smc/smc_core.c: In function ‘__smc_buf_create’: net/smc/smc_core.c:567: warning: ‘bufsize’ may be used uninitialized in this function Indeed, if the for-loop is never executed, bufsize is used uninitialized. In addition, buf_desc is stored for later use, while it is still a NULL pointer. Before, error handling was done by checking if buf_desc is non-NULL. The cleanup changed this to an error check, but forgot to update the preinitialization of buf_desc to an error pointer. Update the preinitializatin of buf_desc to fix this. Fixes: b33982c3a6838d13 ("net/smc: cleanup function __smc_buf_create()") Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> --- I don't know if this can ever happen, but the old code handled it. --- net/smc/smc_core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)