[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202006200854.B2D8F21@keescook>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 08:57:04 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org,
drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Clang-Built-Linux ML <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/16] Remove uninitialized_var() macro
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 09:03:34AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:30 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > v2:
> > - more special-cased fixes
> > - add reviews
> > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200603233203.1695403-1-keescook@chromium.org
> >
> > Using uninitialized_var() is dangerous as it papers over real bugs[1]
> > (or can in the future), and suppresses unrelated compiler warnings
> > (e.g. "unused variable"). If the compiler thinks it is uninitialized,
> > either simply initialize the variable or make compiler changes.
> >
> > As recommended[2] by[3] Linus[4], remove the macro.
> >
> > Most of the 300 uses don't cause any warnings on gcc 9.3.0, so they're in
> > a single treewide commit in this series. A few others needed to actually
> > get cleaned up, and I broke those out into individual patches.
> >
> > The tree is:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git/log/?h=kspp/uninit/macro
> >
> > -Kees
> >
>
> Hi Kees,
>
> thanks for doing a v2 of your patchset.
>
> As I saw Jason Yan providing some "uninitialized_var() macro" patches
> to the MLs I pointen him to your tree "v1".
Thanks!
> BTW, I have tested your "v1" against Linux v5.7 (see [1]) - just
> yesterday with Linux v5.7.5-rc1.
>
> Is it possible to have a v2 of this patchset on top od Linux v5.7 - if
> you do not mind.
Since it's only going to be for post-v5.8, I'm fine skipping the v5.7
testing. Mainly I'm looking at v5.8 and linux-next.
Thanks for looking at it!
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists