linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/9] tty: n_gsm: fix unneeded initialization of ret in gsm_dlci

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 11:23:09 +0300 (EEST)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "D. Starke" <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
cc:     linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] tty: n_gsm: fix unneeded initialization of ret in
 gsm_dlci_config

On Wed, 5 Apr 2023, D. Starke wrote:

> From: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
> 
> The variable 'ret' is not used before assignment from gsm_activate_mux().
> Still it gets initialized to zero at declaration.
> 
> Fix this as remarked in the link below by removing the initialization.
> 
> Fixes: edd5f60c3400 ("tty: n_gsm: fix mux activation issues in gsm_config()")

This doesn't "fix" any bug so Fixes tag seems inappropriate unless does it 
fix a compiler warning (in which case you should quote the warning in 
this changelog and state you're fixing this warning from compiler)?

> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/b42bc4d1-cc9d-d115-c981-aaa053bdc59f@kernel.org/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> index eb21ca583642..d42b92cbae88 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> @@ -3276,7 +3276,7 @@ static void gsm_copy_config_values(struct gsm_mux *gsm,
>  
>  static int gsm_config(struct gsm_mux *gsm, struct gsm_config *c)
>  {
> -	int ret = 0;
> +	int ret;

While at it, I'd move the declaration into the block where it's used so 
the scope where the variable is used is easier to see on the first glance.

>  	int need_close = 0;
>  	int need_restart = 0;
>  
> 


-- 
 i.