linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] FC: cifs: Initialized an uninitialized variable

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTi==7wv6mrL5OWkGKxyc7GbKPH5+kgkCBNUcj3im@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 7 Mar 2011 22:38:25 -0600
From:	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Vinay Sawal <vinaysawal@...il.com>, sfrench@...ba.org,
	linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FC: cifs: Initialized an uninitialized variable

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 08:00:09PM -0800, Vinay Sawal wrote:
>> Removed a compile time warning by initializing an uninitialized variable.
>
>> -     int rc;
>> +     int rc = -EFAULT;
>
> Why is that the right thing to do?  Other than "it made the compiler to
> STFU, therefore it is Good(tm)", please.

Hard to disagree with Al's logic, although changing the scope of rc to
within the for loop might also make both your compiler happy and more
sense.   In any case, I prefer real bug fixes.


-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
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/