From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933416AbcJ0NtF (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 09:49:05 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:50518 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933084AbcJ0NtD (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 09:49:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:12:42 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Oleg Drokin , Patrick Farrell , lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org, Bobi Jam , James Simmons , Olaf Weber , James Simmons , Jinshan Xiong , "John L . Hammond" , Liang Zhen , Andreas Dilger , Shivani Bhardwaj , Andriy Skulysh , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] staging: lustre: remove broken dead code in cfs_cpt_table_create_pattern Message-ID: <20161027131242.GA11187@kroah.com> References: <20161025212310.2346367-1-arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161025212310.2346367-1-arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:22:30PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > After a recent bugfix, we get a warning about the use of an uninitialized > variable: > > drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/libcfs/linux/linux-cpu.c: In function 'cfs_cpt_table_create_pattern': > drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/libcfs/linux/linux-cpu.c:833:7: error: 'str' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > This part of the function used to not do anything as we would reassign > the 'str' pointer to something else right away, but now we pass an > uninitialized pointer into 'strchr', which can cause a kernel page fault > or worse. > > Fixes: 239fd5d41f9b ("staging: lustre: libcfs: shortcut to create CPT from NUMA topology") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > --- > drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/libcfs/linux/linux-cpu.c | 7 ------- > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) Hm, I already applied the v1 versions of these, right? What changed with these, they seem identical to me... thanks, greg k-h