| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20081001083532.GE31009@elte.hu> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists