[KJ] [PATCH] arch/i386/kernel/efi.c: fixing uninitialised variable

[KJ] [PATCH] arch/i386/kernel/efi.c: fixing uninitialised variable

[thompsy]

Hello All,

I'm going to try and work through some of the gcc warnings generated from
building the kernel. I've included my first patch below but have a question
first.

Having looking in MAINTAINERS I wasn't sure who the appropriate person
would be to CC this to. The closest thing I could find was FIRMWARE LOADER
header which is listed as an orphan. In this case should I just CC to LKML?

The patch initialises the prev struct as it gets checked before being
initialised later in the code. This removes the warning generated by gcc.

Any feedback welcome.
Thanks

Signed-off-by: Andrew Thompson <thompsy@gmail.com>
---
diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/efi.c b/arch/i386/kernel/efi.c
index a180802..8a9faeb 100644
--- a/arch/i386/kernel/efi.c
+++ b/arch/i386/kernel/efi.c
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ void efi_memmap_walk(efi_freemem_callbac
 	struct range {
 		unsigned long start;
 		unsigned long end;
-	} prev, curr;
+	} prev={}, curr;
 	efi_memory_desc_t *md;
 	unsigned long start, end;
 	void *p;
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] [PATCH] arch/i386/kernel/efi.c: fixing uninitialised variable

[Florian Westphal]

thompsy <thompsy@gmail.com> wrote:
[arch/i386/kernel/efi.c:efi_memmap_walk() uninitialized access]

> The patch initialises the prev struct as it gets checked before being
> initialised later in the code. This removes the warning generated by gcc.

Please provide a description where/when uninitialized access occurs.
I looked at the code and couldn't find any.

Florian
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] [PATCH] arch/i386/kernel/efi.c: fixing uninitialised variable

[Andrew Thompson]

Florian Westphal wrote:
> thompsy <thompsy@gmail.com> wrote:
> [arch/i386/kernel/efi.c:efi_memmap_walk() uninitialized access]
> 
>> The patch initialises the prev struct as it gets checked before being
>> initialised later in the code. This removes the warning generated by gcc.
> 
> Please provide a description where/when uninitialized access occurs.
> I looked at the code and couldn't find any.
> 
> Florian
> _______________________________________________
> Kernel-janitors mailing list
> Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
> 
I just looked again and noticed my mistake. I missed the initialisation 
from curr, d'oh. I'll try to be more careful next time.

Thanks for looking
--
Andrew Thompson
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors