linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Silence an uninitialized variable 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: <20191205093229.GE2810@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:32:29 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Silence an uninitialized variable warning

On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 09:42:47PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> > The current code has this:
> > 
> > static int __init syscall_enter_define_fields(struct trace_event_call *call)
> > {
> > 	struct syscall_trace_enter trace;
> > 	struct syscall_metadata *meta = call->data;
> > 	int ret;
> > 	int i;
> > 	int offset = offsetof(typeof(trace), args);
> > 
> > 	ret = trace_define_field(call, SYSCALL_FIELD(int, nr, __syscall_nr),
> > 				 FILTER_OTHER);
> 
> In linux-next this ret = trace_define_field() assignment is removed.
> That was commit 60fdad00827c ("ftrace: Rework event_create_dir()").

Yep, mea culpa.

> > 	if (ret)
> > 		return ret;
> > 
> > 	for (i = 0; i < meta->nb_args; i++) {
> > 		ret = trace_define_field(call, meta->types[i],
> > 					 meta->args[i], offset,
> > 					 sizeof(unsigned long), 0,
> > 					 FILTER_OTHER);
> > 		offset += sizeof(unsigned long);
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	return ret;
> > }
> > 
> > 
> > How can ret possibly be uninitialized?
> 
> I should have written this commit more carefully and verified whether
> meta->nb_args can actually be zero instead of just assuming it was a
> false positive...

Right, I'm thinking this is in fact possible. We have syscalls without
arguments (sys_sched_yield for exmaple).