[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200219152120.GA18253@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 16:21:20 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...hat.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@....com>,
Marta Rybczynska <mrybczyn@...ray.eu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: fix uninitialized-variable warning
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 04:51:06AM +0900, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 07:48:15AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 04:36:48PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > This one is just gross. I think we'll need to find some other fix
> > > > that doesn't obsfucate the code as much.
> > >
> > > Initializing the nvme_result in nvme_features() would do it, as would
> > > setting it in the error path in __nvme_submit_sync_cmd() -- either
> > > way the compiler cannot be confused about whether it is initialized
> > > later on.
> >
> > Given that this is outside the hot path we can just zero the whole
> > structure before submitting the I/O.
>
> I think this should be okay:
This looks good. Can you send a formal patch?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists