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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 09:45:56 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> Cc: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>, Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher@...adex.com>, Philippe Schenker <philippe.schenker@...adex.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: stmpe-adc: Shuffle an if statement around in stmpe_adc_isr On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:31:55 -0800 Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:16 AM Nathan Chancellor > <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote: > > > > When building with -Wsometimes-uninitialized, Clang warns: > > > > drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c:204:13: warning: variable 'data' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] > > > > Clang can't tell that data will never be used uninitialized because the > > two if statements take care of all cases. Remove the first if statement > > and make it the else branch of the second one so that it is apparent to > > Clang that all cases are covered. > > > > Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/387 > > Suggested-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> > > LGTM, thanks Nathan. > Reviewed-by: NIck Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> Agreed. Seems obviously correct. Stefan, I'm only pushing this out as testing for now so happy to rebase if you have comments. Thanks, Jonathan > > > --- > > drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c | 5 ++--- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c > > index 37f4b74a5d32..7921f827c6ec 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c > > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/stmpe-adc.c > > @@ -184,9 +184,6 @@ static irqreturn_t stmpe_adc_isr(int irq, void *dev_id) > > struct stmpe_adc *info = (struct stmpe_adc *)dev_id; > > u16 data; > > > > - if (info->channel > STMPE_TEMP_CHANNEL) > > - return IRQ_NONE; > > - > > if (info->channel <= STMPE_ADC_LAST_NR) { > > int int_sta; > > > > @@ -205,6 +202,8 @@ static irqreturn_t stmpe_adc_isr(int irq, void *dev_id) > > /* Read value */ > > stmpe_block_read(info->stmpe, STMPE_REG_TEMP_DATA, 2, > > (u8 *) &data); > > + } else { > > + return IRQ_NONE; > > } > > > > info->value = (u32) be16_to_cpu(data); > > -- > > 2.21.0 > > > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists