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:   Thu, 6 Apr 2023 05:31:54 +0000
From:   "Starke, Daniel" <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
To:     Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.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

> > 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)?

No, it does not change any compiler warning. I will remove the tag.

> > 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.

I will move it accordingly.

Best regards,
Daniel Starke