linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: pfuze100-regulator: Variable "val" in pfuze100_regulator

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABvMjLT=WzpzPY+15nyOL9NVkyMzpQNyK+6w_cjde11vJiLBfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 09:21:14 -0700
From:   Yizhuo Zhai <yzhai003@....edu>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Chengyu Song <csong@...ucr.edu>, Zhiyun Qian <zhiyunq@...ucr.edu>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: pfuze100-regulator: Variable "val" in
 pfuze100_regulator_probe() could be uninitialized

Thanks Mark, I will send a new patch and check the return value instead.

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:26 AM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 03:10:47PM -0700, Yizhuo wrote:
> > In function pfuze100_regulator_probe(), variable "val" could be
> > initialized if regmap_read() fails. However, "val" is used to
> > decide the control flow later in the if statement, which is
> > potentially unsafe.
>
> >               struct regulator_desc *desc;
> > -             int val;
> > +             int val = 0;
>
> This just unconditionally assings a value to this variable which will
> stop any warnings but there's no analysis explaining why this is a good
> fix - are we actually forgetting to check something we should be
> checking, are we sure that this is the correct value to use?



-- 
Kind Regards,

Yizhuo Zhai

Computer Science, Graduate Student
University of California, Riverside