linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the cifs tree

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, 3 Jan 2018 16:44:59 -0600
From:   Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>,
        Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@...rosoft.com>,
        Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the cifs tree

I don't see this with gcc 5.4

Stephen,
Harmless to initialize flags here ... even if unneeded ... so if it
makes your life easier I don't mind initializes to 0.  Let me know.
Wonder why it doesn't generate the warning on the various other places
in the fs that do the same thing?

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the cifs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) produced this warning:
>
> In file included from include/linux/seqlock.h:36:0,
>                  from include/linux/time.h:6,
>                  from include/linux/stat.h:19,
>                  from include/linux/module.h:10,
>                  from fs/cifs/smbdirect.c:16:
> fs/cifs/smbdirect.c: In function 'smbd_recv_buf':
> include/linux/spinlock.h:260:3: warning: 'flags' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>    _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags); \
>    ^
> fs/cifs/smbdirect.c:1865:16: note: 'flags' was declared here
>   unsigned long flags;
>                 ^
>
> Introduced by commit
>
>   ac69f66e54ca ("CIFS: SMBD: Implement function to receive data via RDMA receive")
>
> OK, this is a false positive, but annoying.
>
> I am using gcc 5.2.0.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



-- 
Thanks,

Steve