| Message ID | 20230706022630.GA11476@frogsfrogsfrogs (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | xfs: fix uninit warning in xfs_growfs_data | expand |
On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 07:26:30PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > Quiet down this gcc warning: > > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c: In function ‘xfs_growfs_data’: > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c:219:21: error: ‘lastag_extended’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > 219 | if (lastag_extended) { > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c:100:33: note: ‘lastag_extended’ was declared here > 100 | bool lastag_extended; > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > By setting its value explicitly. From code analysis I don't think this > is a real problem, but I have better things to do than analyse this > closely. Huh. What compiler is complaining about that? > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > index 65473bc52c7d..96edc87bf030 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ xfs_growfs_data_private( > xfs_agnumber_t nagimax = 0; > xfs_rfsblock_t nb, nb_div, nb_mod; > int64_t delta; > - bool lastag_extended; > + bool lastag_extended = false; > xfs_agnumber_t oagcount; > struct xfs_trans *tp; > struct aghdr_init_data id = {}; Looks good, Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 08:54:10AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 07:26:30PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > > > Quiet down this gcc warning: > > > > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c: In function ‘xfs_growfs_data’: > > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c:219:21: error: ‘lastag_extended’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > > 219 | if (lastag_extended) { > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c:100:33: note: ‘lastag_extended’ was declared here > > 100 | bool lastag_extended; > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > By setting its value explicitly. From code analysis I don't think this > > is a real problem, but I have better things to do than analyse this > > closely. > > Huh. What compiler is complaining about that? gcc 11.3, though oddly this only happens when I turn on gcov. Not sure what sorcery gets enabled with that, but it got in the way of teaching the fstests cloud to spit out 60MB(!) of coverage reports for each fstests run, and the source code fix seemed obvious. > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > --- > > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > > index 65473bc52c7d..96edc87bf030 100644 > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c > > @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ xfs_growfs_data_private( > > xfs_agnumber_t nagimax = 0; > > xfs_rfsblock_t nb, nb_div, nb_mod; > > int64_t delta; > > - bool lastag_extended; > > + bool lastag_extended = false; > > xfs_agnumber_t oagcount; > > struct xfs_trans *tp; > > struct aghdr_init_data id = {}; > > Looks good, > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> Thanks! --D > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c index 65473bc52c7d..96edc87bf030 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ xfs_growfs_data_private( xfs_agnumber_t nagimax = 0; xfs_rfsblock_t nb, nb_div, nb_mod; int64_t delta; - bool lastag_extended; + bool lastag_extended = false; xfs_agnumber_t oagcount; struct xfs_trans *tp; struct aghdr_init_data id = {};