[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb05c3956eba18a8b01e8a8fa0396c7b@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 16:50:17 +0200
From: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@...e.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG]: mm/vmalloc: uninitialized variable access in
pcpu_get_vm_areas
On 2019-06-17 16:44, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:12 PM Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 02:14:11PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > gcc points out some obviously broken code in linux-next
>> >
>> > mm/vmalloc.c: In function 'pcpu_get_vm_areas':
>> > mm/vmalloc.c:991:4: error: 'lva' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
>> > insert_vmap_area_augment(lva, &va->rb_node,
>> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> > &free_vmap_area_root, &free_vmap_area_list);
>> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> > mm/vmalloc.c:916:20: note: 'lva' was declared here
>> > struct vmap_area *lva;
>> > ^~~
>> >
>> > Remove the obviously broken code. This is almost certainly
>> > not the correct solution, but it's what I have applied locally
>> > to get a clean build again.
>> >
>> > Please fix this properly.
>> >
>
>> >
>> Please do not apply this. It will just break everything.
>
> As I wrote in my description, this was purely meant as a bug
> report, not a patch to be applied.
That's a perfect way to attract attention! :)
>
>> As Roman pointed we can just set lva = NULL; in the beginning to make
>> GCC happy.
>> For some reason GCC decides that it can be used uninitialized, but
>> that
>> is not true.
>
> I got confused by the similarly named FL_FIT_TYPE/NE_FIT_TYPE
Names are indeed very confusing, that is true. Very easy to mix up
things.
--
Roman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists