[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMzqmN1dYpbYSCXWN9VwHn8+MXj3P=G09qD6=atwrcJ8WA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 13:17:42 +0200
From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Subject: Question on commit dc7109aaa233 ("futex: Validate waiter correctly in futex_proxy_trylock_atomic()")
Dear Thomas,
in commit dc7109aaa233 ("futex: Validate waiter correctly in
futex_proxy_trylock_atomic()") visible on next-20210819, you add:
+ /*
+ * Ensure that this is a waiter sitting in futex_wait_requeue_pi()
+ * and waiting on the 'waitqueue' futex which is always !PI.
+ */
+ if (!top_waiter->rt_waiter || top_waiter->pi_state)
+ ret = -EINVAL;
However, ret is unconditionally reassigned later and erases any
intended effect of this assignment. This is making that assignment
above a Dead Store, which clang-analyzer correctly warns about and
which motivates me to write you an email.
Did you intend to return -EINVAL here? So:
+ if (!top_waiter->rt_waiter || top_waiter->pi_state)
+ return -EINVAL;
Best regards,
Lukas
Static analysis tools are as foolish as they are... but every dog has its day...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists