linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] ttyprintk: remove redundant initialization of variable i

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: <YK+OmWBq8HmyuM5A@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 May 2021 14:20:41 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] ttyprintk: remove redundant initialization of
 variable i

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 09:54:37AM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> On 21/05/2021 13:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 07:21:26PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> >>
> >> The variable i is being initialized with a value that is never read,
> >> it is being updated later on.  The assignment is redundant and can be
> >> removed.
> >>
> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/char/ttyprintk.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/char/ttyprintk.c b/drivers/char/ttyprintk.c
> >> index 219fa1382396..230b2c9b3e3c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/char/ttyprintk.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/char/ttyprintk.c
> >> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static void tpk_flush(void)
> >>  
> >>  static int tpk_printk(const unsigned char *buf, int count)
> >>  {
> >> -	int i = tpk_curr;
> >> +	int i;
> >>  
> >>  	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> >>  		if (tpk_curr >= TPK_STR_SIZE) {
> >> -- 
> >> 2.31.1
> >>
> > 
> > This is not ok for what is currently in linux-next :(
> 
> Hmm, it applies cleanly on today's linux-next, do you mind re-apply it?

Argh, I was looking at the wrong tree, sorry, now queued up.

thanks,

greg "I have too many different trees" k-h