[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47668d94-6b55-2894-fa6d-82b1f17312bf@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 15:16:02 +0200
From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/xen: silence smatch warning in pmu_msr_chk_emulated()
On 20.10.2022 13:37, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Commit 8714f7bcd3c2 ("xen/pv: add fault recovery control to pmu msr
> accesses") introduced code resulting in a warning issued by the smatch
> static checker, claiming to use an uninitialized variable.
>
> This is a false positive, but work around the warning nevertheless.
The risk of introducing a problem might be quite low here, but in general
it exists: With the adjustment you remove any chance of the compiler
spotting a missing initialization before use. And I'm not convinced using
0 in such a case would actually be ending up sufficiently benign.
Jan
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/pmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/pmu.c
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static bool xen_amd_pmu_emulate(unsigned int msr, u64 *val, bool is_read)
> static bool pmu_msr_chk_emulated(unsigned int msr, uint64_t *val, bool is_read,
> bool *emul)
> {
> - int type, index;
> + int type = 0, index = 0;
>
> if (is_amd_pmu_msr(msr))
> *emul = xen_amd_pmu_emulate(msr, val, is_read);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists