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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <2154537.J75p8oY6mX@wuerfel> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 15:59:17 +0100 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Vasily Averin <vvs@...tuozzo.com> Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, nhorman@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com, jogreene@...hat.com Subject: Re: [net,2/2] net: i40e: shut up uninitialized variable warnings On Saturday 30 January 2016 18:33:26 Vasily Averin wrote: > On 26.01.2016 02:58, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> > > > > intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c: In function 'i40e_xmit_frame_ring': > > intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c:2367:20: error: 'oiph' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c:2317:16: note: 'oiph' was declared here > > intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c:2367:17: error: 'oudph' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c:2316:17: note: 'oudph' was declared here > > 2364 if ((tx_ring->flags & I40E_TXR_FLAGS_OUTER_UDP_CSUM) && > 2365 (l4_tunnel == I40E_TXD_CTX_UDP_TUNNELING) && > 2366 (*cd_tunneling & I40E_TXD_CTX_QW0_EXT_IP_MASK)) { > 2367 oudph->check = ~csum_tcpudp_magic(oiph->saddr, > 2368 oiph->daddr, > 2369 (skb->len - skb_transport_offset(skb)), > 2370 IPPROTO_UDP, 0); > > if compiler reports that oudph and oiph can be unitialized here, > it's not enough just to set them to NULL. > > Do we need probably to check that variables was initialized before access here? > i.e. add oudph && oiph into condition? Sorry, I should not have mentioned my patch when it wasn't meant as a serious submission. The patch I sent did not have a proper changelog on it so it failed to explain it. The reason why my patch works correctly is that the check on "l4_tunnel == I40E_TXD_CTX_UDP_TUNNELING" means we can only get here if the two variables have been initialized, and gcc fails to see this. Jeff mentioned that he already had a patch for this, so I did not follow up with a real patch. Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists