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  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, 29 Nov 2017 09:20:02 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <>,
        Tatyana Nikolova <>,
        Doug Ledford <>,
        linux-rdma <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] RDMA/iwpm: Fix uninitialized error code in iwpm_send_mapinfo()

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<> wrote:
> Hi Jason,
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Jason Gunthorpe <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:26:04AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> With gcc-4.1.2:
>>>     drivers/infiniband/core/iwpm_util.c: In function ‘iwpm_send_mapinfo’:
>>>     drivers/infiniband/core/iwpm_util.c:647: warning: ‘ret’ may be used uninitialized in this function
>>> Indeed, if nl_client is not found in any of the scanned has buckets, ret
>>> will be used uninitialized.
>>> Preinitialize ret to zero to fix this.
>> Did we come to a conclusion if we should apply this to the RMDA tree? The
>> patch was marked RFC..
> So far no one commented on what's the correct behavior in case of failure,
> which was the actual reason for the RFC.

As I said above, I think initializing to -EINVAL would be better than 0 here,
but initializing 'ret' at declaration time is appropriate here (though
I normally
try to avoid doing so, see


Powered by blists - more mailing lists