linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: work around false-positive maybe-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: <159059423232.30979.11698525690770673738@build.alporthouse.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 16:43:52 +0100
From:   Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@...el.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@...el.com>,
        Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@...ux.intel.com>,
        Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@...el.com>,
        Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@...el.com>,
        "Robert M. Fosha" <robert.m.fosha@...el.com>,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: work around false-positive maybe-uninitialized warning

Quoting Arnd Bergmann (2020-05-27 15:05:09)
> gcc-9 gets confused by the code flow in check_dirty_whitelist:
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_workarounds.c: In function 'check_dirty_whitelist':
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_workarounds.c:492:17: error: 'rsvd' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> 
> I could not figure out a good way to do this in a way that gcc
> understands better, so initialize the variable to zero, as last
> resort.

Does it look neater if we initialise it as a local? No.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris