netdev - Re: [linux-next:master] BUILD REGRESSION 89bf6e28373beef9577fa71f996a5f73a569617c

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

Message-ID: <20221025161716.1b92a033@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 25 Oct 2022 16:17:16 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
Cc:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        ntfs3@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master] BUILD REGRESSION
 89bf6e28373beef9577fa71f996a5f73a569617c

On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 16:04:15 -0700 Doug Berger wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 01:17:48 +0800 kernel test robot wrote:  
> >> drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/genet/bcmgenet.c:1497:5-13: ERROR: invalid reference to the index variable of the iterator on line 1475  
> > 
> > CC Doug  
> Thanks for highlighting this for me, but I happened to catch it from the 
> linux-mm list and was just looking into it.
> 
> It looks to me like a false positive since I am initializing the 
> loc_rule variable in all paths outside of the list_for_each_entry() loop 
> prior to its use on line 1497.

Ack, indeed the code looks right. Thanks for investigating.

> If desired I can submit a new patch to make coccinelle happy.

I wonder if Cocci can detect writes. Let me add Julia for visibility.

If not we can use a different variable for the "check if already
exists" iteration? It could make the code easier to follow, IMHO.
Or leave it be.