From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51487)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>) id 1aqmhQ-00020d-5F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:13:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>) id 1aqmhM-0002io-TI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:13:08 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:18881)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>) id 1aqmhM-0002ii-OE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:13:04 -0400
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:12:53 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <20160414191253.GH4247@mwanda>
References: <20160414093337.GD16549@mwanda>
	<20160414184005.GC7821@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160414184005.GC7821@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential
 unintialized variable
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <somlo@cmu.edu>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 02:40:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't
>   ^                               ^
>   If                            returns
> 
> > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug.
> 
> 
> In principle I'm OK with being cautious and initializing local
> variables just in case, but I'm curious:
> 
> acpi_acquire_global_lock() (and its friend, acpi_release_global_lock())
> are both wrapped inside the same macro -- ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS
> -- which either makes them both do something useful, or makes them both
> no-ops returning a hardcoded AE_NOT_CONFIGURED.
> 
> So what else do you think could be a way to get very unlucky ?

If "glk" happened to to equal acpi_gbl_global_lock_handle by chance
then we would release it without acquiring it first.  Actually I could
initialize it to zero and that would be better, no?

regards,
dan carpenter