[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yun6I/drpxG4L4RO@magnolia>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 21:31:31 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Sherry Yang <sherry.yang@...cle.com>, dchinner@...hat.com,
allison.henderson@...cle.com, chandanrlinux@...il.com,
bfoster@...hat.com, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] xfs: initialize error in xfs_defer_finish_one
On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 06:49:02AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 12:03:11PM -0700, Sherry Yang wrote:
> > Path through non-void function 'xfs_defer_finish_one' may return error
> > uninitialized if no iteration of 'list_for_each_safe' occurs. Fix this
> > by initializing error.
>
> I didn't think this situation was possible - how do we get deferred
> work queued with no work items on it?
>
> If we can return an uninitialised error from xfs_defer_finish_one()
> because of an empty queued work, then something else has gone wrong
> earlier in the work deferral process. If this can actually happen,
> then we need to fix whatever is creating the empty work rather than
> paper over it by initialising the error being returned for empty
> works...
/me bets this is a response to a static checker that doesn't know that
list_empty(&dfp->dfp_work) == false in all circumstances. It's not
possible for tp->t_dfops to contain an xfs_defer_pending with no work
items.
--D
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@...morbit.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists