From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2425F01E-DE0C-4A43-B68D-900BABFE24B6@holtmann.org> References: <20180209131028.16874-1-luiz.dentz@gmail.com> <2425F01E-DE0C-4A43-B68D-900BABFE24B6@holtmann.org> From: Luiz Augusto von Dentz Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 09:29:26 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH BlueZ] unit/test-ecc: Fix uninitialised values To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-ID: Hi, On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Luiz, > >> Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) >> at 0x40208C: test_sample (test-ecc.c:106) >> by 0x4022AB: test_invalid_pub (test-ecc.c:272) >> by 0x406DA2: run_callback (tester.c:415) >> by 0x4E83576: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E86B76: g_main_context_dispatch (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E86F1F: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E87231: g_main_loop_run (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x408245: tester_run (tester.c:830) >> by 0x401CC3: main (test-ecc.c:291) >> >> Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) >> at 0x4020D6: test_sample (test-ecc.c:113) >> by 0x4022AB: test_invalid_pub (test-ecc.c:272) >> by 0x406DA2: run_callback (tester.c:415) >> by 0x4E83576: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E86B76: g_main_context_dispatch (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E86F1F: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x4E87231: g_main_loop_run (in /usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.5400.3) >> by 0x408245: tester_run (tester.c:830) >> by 0x401CC3: main (test-ecc.c:291) >> --- >> unit/test-ecc.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/unit/test-ecc.c b/unit/test-ecc.c >> index 98400a253..e0f9723fc 100644 >> --- a/unit/test-ecc.c >> +++ b/unit/test-ecc.c >> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static int test_sample(uint8_t priv_a[32], uint8_t priv_b[32], >> uint8_t pub_a[64], uint8_t pub_b[64], >> uint8_t dhkey[32]) >> { >> - uint8_t dhkey_a[32], dhkey_b[32]; >> + uint8_t dhkey_a[32] = {}, dhkey_b[32] = {}; >> int fails = 0; > > does an explicit memset also fixes this? Applied after changing it to use memsets. -- Luiz Augusto von Dentz