linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix: Uninitialized variable p.

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: <20201230071732.GA4256@nautica>
Date:   Wed, 30 Dec 2020 08:17:32 +0100
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     YANG LI <abaci-bugfix@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, ericvh@...il.com,
        lucho@...kov.net, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix: Uninitialized variable p.

YANG LI wrote on Wed, Dec 30, 2020:
> The pointer p is being used but it isn't being initialized,
> need to assign a NULL to it.

My understanding is p has to be initialized: the only way out of the
while(1) loop below sets it.


I don't mind fixing false positive warnings as it makes maintenance
easier for everyone, but:

 1/ the commit message needs to reflect that and at least name which
tool had a problem with it. I'm tempted to think this case is common
enough that the tool ought to be fixed instead...

 2/ the code needs to work in the p=NULL case if you set it that way
(right now, it doesn't, so in the event the code changes in the future
and there really comes a way to skip initialization this change would
actually hinder bug detection -- it'd need to add a p == NULL check
below, which is going to be useless code, but hopefully compilers will
optimize it away)


Thanks,
-- 
Dominique