linux-kernel - Re: drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/fs_counters.c:173 mlx5_fc_stats_query_all_counters() error: uninitialized symbol 'bulk_query

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c90846fa-7296-4d68-9d1b-81de0b6a611a@stanley.mountain>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 14:19:10 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@...dia.com>
Cc: "oe-kbuild@...ts.linux.dev" <oe-kbuild@...ts.linux.dev>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"lkp@...el.com" <lkp@...el.com>,
	"oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev" <oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/fs_counters.c:173
 mlx5_fc_stats_query_all_counters() error: uninitialized symbol
 'bulk_query_time'.

On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 10:09:59AM +0000, Cosmin Ratiu wrote:
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks for the report. But this came up during the submission and the
> conclusion was that this is a false positive from Smatch.
> See the discussions:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/0dce2c1d2f8adccbfbff39118af9796d84404a67.camel@nvidia.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/66ccbb841794c98b91d9e8aba48b90c63caa45e7.camel@nvidia.com/
> You were also part of that thread and you reported no issue on your
> side back then:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/fcecb18a-1a30-400d-b8ec-1806d856d145@stanley.mountain/
> 
> I am not sure what the conclusion was on the Smatch side, whether there
> were planned fixes or the whole thing was just forgotten.

Ah, yes.  Thanks.  I have written a patch to silence this in Smatch, and
I'll test and push it later.

As a human reader it was the unlikely() annotation which confused me.

regards,
dan carpenter