From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [bug report] netfilter: nft_payload: layer 4 checksum adjustment for pseudoheader fields Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:32:49 +0100 Message-ID: <20161206123249.GA14969@salvia> References: <20161206115734.GA30548@elgon.mountain> <20161206121608.GA1987@salvia> <20161206122453.GH8244@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Carpenter Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:54224 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751689AbcLFMc5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2016 07:32:57 -0500 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id E22528CD7F for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:32:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3216DA843 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:32:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5D6DA843 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:32:50 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161206122453.GH8244@mwanda> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:24:53PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 01:16:08PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 02:57:34PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > Hello Pablo Neira Ayuso, > > > > > > The patch 556c291b3a1b: "netfilter: nft_payload: layer 4 checksum > > > adjustment for pseudoheader fields" from Nov 24, 2016, leads to the > > > following static checker warning: > > > > > > net/netfilter/nft_payload.c:301 nft_payload_set_eval() > > > error: uninitialized symbol 'fsum'. > > > > This should restrict this case you're reporting here: > > > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/pablo/nf-next.git/commit/?id=a3c91a548b9b9f05f81e7bfe7fec3544a376269a > > > > Otherwise let me know, thanks. > > That works... Seems like it would have been easier to just move it > under the if statement though... Right. Will revisit this, thanks.