linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip] sdhci: 'scratch' may be used uninitialized

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:35:32 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, drzeus@...eus.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] sdhci: 'scratch' may be used uninitialized


* Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net> wrote:
> > -       u32 scratch;
> > +       u32 uninitialized_var(scratch);
> 
> A bit of a further explanation:
> 
> The variable 'scratch' is always initialized before it's used. The
> conditional which is responsible for initialization of 'scratch' will
> always evaluate 'true' when the first loop iteration occurs, and thus,
> it's properly initialized. GCC doesn't see this, of course, so using
> the uninitialized_var() macro seems to work for silencing this case.

another small workflow suggestion: when you add explanation for the 
changelog it's better to just include the updated patch (dont worry 
about the duplication) - that way maintainers dont have to cut&slice the 
patch and the description toghether. [which is not just a matter of 
wasting time, but if you do tons of patch juggling, it becomes a real 
risk factor.]

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/