linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Remove redundant initialization of slot

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: <20220103182146.GN28560@twin.jikos.cz>
Date:   Mon, 3 Jan 2022 19:21:46 +0100
From:   David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To:     Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
Cc:     Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>, clm@...com,
        josef@...icpanda.com, dsterba@...e.com,
        linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Remove redundant initialization of slot

On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 09:07:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2021/12/31 20:23, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> > slot is being initialized to path->slots[0] but this is never
> > read as slot is overwritten later on. Remove the redundant
> > initialization.
> >
> > Cleans up the following clang-analyzer warning:
> >
> > fs/btrfs/tree-log.c:6125:7: warning: Value stored to 'slot' during its
> > initialization is never read [clang-analyzer-deadcode.DeadStores].
> >
> > Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> >   fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> > index 9165486b554e..c083562a3334 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> > @@ -6122,7 +6122,7 @@ static int log_new_ancestors(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> >   	while (true) {
> >   		struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = root->fs_info;
> >   		struct extent_buffer *leaf = path->nodes[0];
> > -		int slot = path->slots[0];
> > +		int slot;
> 
> If you're cleaning up slot, then why not also cleaning up leaf?

Yes, the variable leaf does not need to be initialized as well, both
should be cleaned up in the same patch.

> And again, no feedback no matter what on other patches from you, and
> still CC to maintainers.

It's better to add the CCs than not, don't worry about that.