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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:57:22 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        arkadis@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        jhs@...atatu.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
        andrew@...n.ch, simon.horman@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 0/8] Add support for pipeline debug (dpipe)

Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 09:42:58AM CEST, ivecera@...hat.com wrote:
>Dne 28.3.2017 v 09:10 Jiri Pirko napsal(a):
>> Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:48:34AM CEST, davem@...emloft.net wrote:
>> > 
>> > Please fix up these warnings and resubmit:
>> > 
>> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c: In function ‘mlxsw_sp_rif_counter_free’:
>> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c:208:2: warning: ‘p_counter_index’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>> >  mlxsw_sp_rif_counter_edit(mlxsw_sp, rif->rif_index,
>> >  ^
>> 
>> This is I believe also gcc bug. Code looks fine. I'm not getting the warning
>> with gcc 6
>> 
>No it is not a gcc bug. The function mlxsw_sp_rif_counter_free() is not
>static so the compiler cannot know all its callers and so 'dir' parameter can
>be theoretically anything.
>You call mlxsw_sp_rif_p_counter_get() there it assumes dir can be only
>MLXSW_SP_RIF_COUNTER_EGRESS or MLXSW_SP_RIF_COUNTER_INGRESS so initializes
>*pp_counter_index only for them. For any other value the value is
>uninitialized.

Interesting, why gcc 6.2.1 is silent then?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists