[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fbb39e4354434cb99b6f6731cab2e0c9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:13:13 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Enzo Matsumiya' <ematsumiya@...e.de>,
Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
CC: Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>, Paulo Alcantara <pc@....nz>,
"Ronnie Sahlberg" <lsahlber@...hat.com>,
Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>,
"Tom Talpey" <tom@...pey.com>,
"kernel@...labora.com" <kernel@...labora.com>,
"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
"samba-technical@...ts.samba.org" <samba-technical@...ts.samba.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] cifs: remove initialization value
From: Enzo Matsumiya
> Sent: 04 October 2022 15:23
>
> Hi Usama,
>
> On 10/04, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> >Don't initialize the rc as its value is being overwritten before its
> >use.
>
> Being bitten by an unitialized variable bug as recent as 2 days ago, I'd
> say this is a step backwards from the "best practices" POV.
Depends on your POV.
If you don't initialise locals there is a fair chance that the
compiler will detect buggy code.
If you initialise them you get well defined behaviour - but
the compiler won't find bugs for you.
Mostly the kernel is in the first camp.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists