| Message ID | 20220308094519.1816649-3-nava.manne@xilinx.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | fpga: fix for coding style and kernel-doc issues | expand |
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:15:15PM +0530, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > This patch initialized variables with the proper value. > Addresses-Coverity: "uninit_use: Using uninitialized value" > > Signed-off-by: Nava kishore Manne <nava.manne@xilinx.com> > --- > drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > index c60f20949c47..e931d69819a7 100644 > --- a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > +++ b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static int zynqmp_fpga_ops_write(struct fpga_manager *mgr, > const char *buf, size_t size) > { > struct zynqmp_fpga_priv *priv; > - dma_addr_t dma_addr; > + dma_addr_t dma_addr = 0; The first use of this variable is as an output parameter: kbuf = dma_alloc_coherent(priv->dev, size, &dma_addr, GFP_KERNEL); So I don't think it needs to be initialized as 0. Thanks, Yilun > u32 eemi_flags = 0; > char *kbuf; > int ret; > -- > 2.25.1
Hi Yilun, Thanks for providing the review comments. Please find my response inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com> > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 7:58 PM > To: Nava kishore Manne <navam@xilinx.com> > Cc: mdf@kernel.org; hao.wu@intel.com; trix@redhat.com; Michal Simek > <michals@xilinx.com>; linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] fpga: zynqmp: Initialized variables before using it > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:15:15PM +0530, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > > This patch initialized variables with the proper value. > > Addresses-Coverity: "uninit_use: Using uninitialized value" > > > > Signed-off-by: Nava kishore Manne <nava.manne@xilinx.com> > > --- > > drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > index c60f20949c47..e931d69819a7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > +++ b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static int zynqmp_fpga_ops_write(struct > fpga_manager *mgr, > > const char *buf, size_t size) > > { > > struct zynqmp_fpga_priv *priv; > > - dma_addr_t dma_addr; > > + dma_addr_t dma_addr = 0; > > The first use of this variable is as an output parameter: > > kbuf = dma_alloc_coherent(priv->dev, size, &dma_addr, > GFP_KERNEL); > > So I don't think it needs to be initialized as 0. > This issue is found by Coverity Scan, Whether this param is input/output this fix will not impact the actual functionality. In order to fix the issues reported by the Coverity tool, this fix is needed. Regards, Navakishore.
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 11:48:11AM +0000, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > Hi Yilun, > > Thanks for providing the review comments. > Please find my response inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com> > > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 7:58 PM > > To: Nava kishore Manne <navam@xilinx.com> > > Cc: mdf@kernel.org; hao.wu@intel.com; trix@redhat.com; Michal Simek > > <michals@xilinx.com>; linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] fpga: zynqmp: Initialized variables before using it > > > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:15:15PM +0530, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > > > This patch initialized variables with the proper value. > > > Addresses-Coverity: "uninit_use: Using uninitialized value" > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nava kishore Manne <nava.manne@xilinx.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > index c60f20949c47..e931d69819a7 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > +++ b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static int zynqmp_fpga_ops_write(struct > > fpga_manager *mgr, > > > const char *buf, size_t size) > > > { > > > struct zynqmp_fpga_priv *priv; > > > - dma_addr_t dma_addr; > > > + dma_addr_t dma_addr = 0; > > > > The first use of this variable is as an output parameter: > > > > kbuf = dma_alloc_coherent(priv->dev, size, &dma_addr, > > GFP_KERNEL); > > > > So I don't think it needs to be initialized as 0. > > > > This issue is found by Coverity Scan, Whether this param is input/output this fix will not impact the actual functionality. > In order to fix the issues reported by the Coverity tool, this fix is needed. I didn't see issues about this piece of code, so I don't think we need the fix just to make the tool happy. Maybe the tool could be improved to help us better. Thanks, Yilun > > Regards, > Navakishore.
Hi Yilun, Please find my response inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com> > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 9:39 PM > To: Nava kishore Manne <navam@xilinx.com> > Cc: mdf@kernel.org; hao.wu@intel.com; trix@redhat.com; Michal Simek > <michals@xilinx.com>; linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] fpga: zynqmp: Initialized variables before using it > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 11:48:11AM +0000, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > > Hi Yilun, > > > > Thanks for providing the review comments. > > Please find my response inline. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com> > > > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 7:58 PM > > > To: Nava kishore Manne <navam@xilinx.com> > > > Cc: mdf@kernel.org; hao.wu@intel.com; trix@redhat.com; Michal Simek > > > <michals@xilinx.com>; linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] fpga: zynqmp: Initialized variables before > > > using it > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:15:15PM +0530, Nava kishore Manne wrote: > > > > This patch initialized variables with the proper value. > > > > Addresses-Coverity: "uninit_use: Using uninitialized value" > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nava kishore Manne <nava.manne@xilinx.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > > b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c index c60f20949c47..e931d69819a7 > > > > 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c > > > > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static int zynqmp_fpga_ops_write(struct > > > fpga_manager *mgr, > > > > const char *buf, size_t size) { > > > > struct zynqmp_fpga_priv *priv; > > > > - dma_addr_t dma_addr; > > > > + dma_addr_t dma_addr = 0; > > > > > > The first use of this variable is as an output parameter: > > > > > > kbuf = dma_alloc_coherent(priv->dev, size, &dma_addr, > GFP_KERNEL); > > > > > > So I don't think it needs to be initialized as 0. > > > > > > > This issue is found by Coverity Scan, Whether this param is input/output > this fix will not impact the actual functionality. > > In order to fix the issues reported by the Coverity tool, this fix is needed. > > I didn't see issues about this piece of code, so I don't think we need the fix > just to make the tool happy. Maybe the tool could be improved to help us > better. > Agreed, I will drop this patch in v2. Regards, Navakishore.
diff --git a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c index c60f20949c47..e931d69819a7 100644 --- a/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c +++ b/drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ static int zynqmp_fpga_ops_write(struct fpga_manager *mgr, const char *buf, size_t size) { struct zynqmp_fpga_priv *priv; - dma_addr_t dma_addr; + dma_addr_t dma_addr = 0; u32 eemi_flags = 0; char *kbuf; int ret;
This patch initialized variables with the proper value. Addresses-Coverity: "uninit_use: Using uninitialized value" Signed-off-by: Nava kishore Manne <nava.manne@xilinx.com> --- drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)