From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752511AbcCKLTz (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 06:19:55 -0500 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:27124 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751684AbcCKLT2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 06:19:28 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:19:09 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Bart Van Assche , Johannes Thumshirn , Ewan Milne , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] scsi_dh_alua: uninitialized variable in alua_check_vpd() Message-ID: <20160311111909.GE5273@mwanda> References: <20160311101756.GA9384@mwanda> <56E2A2F6.30308@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56E2A2F6.30308@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:50:30AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 03/11/2016 11:17 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > The pg_updated variable is support to be set to zero at the start but > > it is uninitialized. > > > > Fixes: cb0a168cb6b8 ('scsi_dh_alua: update 'access_state' field') > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c > > index 5bcdf8d..e4f6174 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c > > @@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ static int alua_check_vpd(struct scsi_device *sdev, struct alua_dh_data *h, > > { > > int rel_port = -1, group_id; > > struct alua_port_group *pg, *old_pg = NULL; > > - bool pg_updated; > > + bool pg_updated = 0; > > unsigned long flags; > > > > group_id = scsi_vpd_tpg_id(sdev, &rel_port); > > > I'd prefer 'pg_updated = false'. > Not that we trip over a static code analyser here :-) Duh... Sorry about that. regards, dan carpenter