linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi: initialize ret variable

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:45:46 +0800
From:   郭力豪 <lhjeff911@...il.com>
To:     Lh Kuo 郭力豪 <lh.Kuo@...plus.com>
Cc:     Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, "nathan@...nel.org" <nathan@...nel.org>,
        "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: initialize ret variable

>Yes, that's what I'm asking.



>The original setting was ret=0; I just wanted to remove it when defining

>the ret, but it looks like it's required.

>Yes, it should return error at default



>I will submit new patch for this.




> The old behavior returned 0 and I am treating this as a regression.

The goal here isn't just to shut up warnings, it's to fix any problems
that they identify.  Unconditionally initialising return values is a
common way of fixing warnings while leaving real problems in place.


The original setting was ret=0; I just wanted to remove it when defining

the ret, but it looks like it's required.

Yes, it should return error at default



I will submit new patch for this.