linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: avoid bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

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: <20190618140622.bbak3is7yv32hfjn@pc636>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:06:22 +0200
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@...e.de>,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        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>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: avoid bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:40:28AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 5:27 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> > gcc gets confused in pcpu_get_vm_areas() because there are too many
> > branches that affect whether 'lva' was initialized before it gets
> > used:
> >
> > 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;
> >                     ^~~
> >
> > Add an intialization to NULL, and check whether this has changed
> > before the first use.
> >
> > Fixes: 68ad4a330433 ("mm/vmalloc.c: keep track of free blocks for vmap allocation")
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > ---
> >  mm/vmalloc.c | 9 +++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > index a9213fc3802d..42a6f795c3ee 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > @@ -913,7 +913,12 @@ adjust_va_to_fit_type(struct vmap_area *va,
> >         unsigned long nva_start_addr, unsigned long size,
> >         enum fit_type type)
> >  {
> > -       struct vmap_area *lva;
> > +       /*
> > +        * GCC cannot always keep track of whether this variable
> > +        * was initialized across many branches, therefore set
> > +        * it NULL here to avoid a warning.
> > +        */
> > +       struct vmap_area *lva = NULL;
> 
> Fair enough, but is this 5-line comment really needed here?
> 
How it is rewritten now, probably not. I would just set it NULL and
leave the comment, but that is IMHO. Anyway

Reviewed-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com>

Thanks!

--
Vlad Rezki