From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: Deming Wang <wangdeming@inspur.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com,
miklos@szeredi.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtiofs: Drop unnecessary initialization in send_forget_request and virtio_fs_get_tree
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 09:30:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YxdLg8tI9OtVjbfe@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220906053848.2503-1-wangdeming@inspur.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1624 bytes --]
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 01:38:48AM -0400, Deming Wang wrote:
> The variable is initialized but it is only used after its assignment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Deming Wang <wangdeming@inspur.com>
> ---
> fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c b/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> index 4d8d4f16c..bffe74d44 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static int send_forget_request(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq,
> {
> struct scatterlist sg;
> struct virtqueue *vq;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
> bool notify;
> struct virtio_fs_forget_req *req = &forget->req;
>
That causes an uninitialized access in the source tree I'm looking at
(c5e4d5e99162ba8025d58a3af7ad103f155d2df7):
static int send_forget_request(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq,
struct virtio_fs_forget *forget,
bool in_flight)
{
struct scatterlist sg;
struct virtqueue *vq;
int ret = 0;
^^^^^^^
bool notify;
struct virtio_fs_forget_req *req = &forget->req;
spin_lock(&fsvq->lock);
if (!fsvq->connected) {
if (in_flight)
dec_in_flight_req(fsvq);
kfree(forget);
goto out;
...
out:
spin_unlock(&fsvq->lock);
return ret;
^^^
}
What is the purpose of this patch? Is there a compiler warning (if so,
which compiler and version)? Do you have a static analysis tool that
reported this (if yes, then maybe it's broken)?
Stefan
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: Deming Wang <wangdeming@inspur.com>
Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtiofs: Drop unnecessary initialization in send_forget_request and virtio_fs_get_tree
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 09:30:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YxdLg8tI9OtVjbfe@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220906053848.2503-1-wangdeming@inspur.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1624 bytes --]
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 01:38:48AM -0400, Deming Wang wrote:
> The variable is initialized but it is only used after its assignment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Deming Wang <wangdeming@inspur.com>
> ---
> fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c b/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> index 4d8d4f16c..bffe74d44 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c
> @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static int send_forget_request(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq,
> {
> struct scatterlist sg;
> struct virtqueue *vq;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
> bool notify;
> struct virtio_fs_forget_req *req = &forget->req;
>
That causes an uninitialized access in the source tree I'm looking at
(c5e4d5e99162ba8025d58a3af7ad103f155d2df7):
static int send_forget_request(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq,
struct virtio_fs_forget *forget,
bool in_flight)
{
struct scatterlist sg;
struct virtqueue *vq;
int ret = 0;
^^^^^^^
bool notify;
struct virtio_fs_forget_req *req = &forget->req;
spin_lock(&fsvq->lock);
if (!fsvq->connected) {
if (in_flight)
dec_in_flight_req(fsvq);
kfree(forget);
goto out;
...
out:
spin_unlock(&fsvq->lock);
return ret;
^^^
}
What is the purpose of this patch? Is there a compiler warning (if so,
which compiler and version)? Do you have a static analysis tool that
reported this (if yes, then maybe it's broken)?
Stefan
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-06 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-06 5:38 [PATCH] virtiofs: Drop unnecessary initialization in send_forget_request and virtio_fs_get_tree Deming Wang
2022-09-06 10:10 ` kernel test robot
2022-09-06 10:10 ` kernel test robot
2022-09-06 13:30 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2022-09-06 13:30 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-09-06 15:56 kernel test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YxdLg8tI9OtVjbfe@fedora \
--to=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=wangdeming@inspur.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.