[PATCH 19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[PATCH 19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[Arnd Bergmann]

A bugfix added a sanity check around the assignment and use of the
'is_11d' variable, which looks correct to me, but as the function is
rather complex already, this confuses the compiler to the point where
it can no longer figure out if the variable is always initialized
correctly:

brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In function ‘brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap’:
brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:4586:10: error: ‘is_11d’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]

This adds an initialization for the newly introduced case in which
the variable should not really be used, in order to make the warning
go away.

Fixes: b3589dfe0212 ("brcmfmac: ignore 11d configuration errors")
Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
index b777e1b..78d9966 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
@@ -4516,7 +4516,7 @@ brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *ndev,
 	/* store current 11d setting */
 	if (brcmf_fil_cmd_int_get(ifp, BRCMF_C_GET_REGULATORY,
 				  &ifp->vif->is_11d)) {
-		supports_11d = false;
+		is_11d = supports_11d = false;
 	} else {
 		country_ie = brcmf_parse_tlvs((u8 *)settings->beacon.tail,
 					      settings->beacon.tail_len,
-- 
2.9.0

Re: [PATCH 19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> A bugfix added a sanity check around the assignment and use of the
> 'is_11d' variable, which looks correct to me, but as the function is
> rather complex already, this confuses the compiler to the point where
> it can no longer figure out if the variable is always initialized
> correctly:
>
> brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In function =E2=80=98brcmf_cfg80211_start_=
ap=E2=80=99:
> brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:4586:10: error: =E2=80=98is_11d=E2=80=99 ma=
y be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=3Dmaybe-uninitialized]
>
> This adds an initialization for the newly introduced case in which
> the variable should not really be used, in order to make the warning
> go away.
>
> Fixes: b3589dfe0212 ("brcmfmac: ignore 11d configuration errors")
> Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Via which tree are you planning to submit this? Should I take it?

--=20
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH 19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 9:49:58 AM CEST Kalle Valo wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
> 
> > A bugfix added a sanity check around the assignment and use of the
> > 'is_11d' variable, which looks correct to me, but as the function is
> > rather complex already, this confuses the compiler to the point where
> > it can no longer figure out if the variable is always initialized
> > correctly:
> >
> > brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In function ‘brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap’:
> > brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:4586:10: error: ‘is_11d’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> >
> > This adds an initialization for the newly introduced case in which
> > the variable should not really be used, in order to make the warning
> > go away.
> >
> > Fixes: b3589dfe0212 ("brcmfmac: ignore 11d configuration errors")
> > Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
> > Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
> > Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> Via which tree are you planning to submit this? Should I take it?

I'd prefer if you can take it and forward it along with your other
bugfixes. I'll try to take care of the ones that nobody else
picked up.

	Arnd

Re: [PATCH 19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 9:49:58 AM CEST Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>>=20
>> > A bugfix added a sanity check around the assignment and use of the
>> > 'is_11d' variable, which looks correct to me, but as the function is
>> > rather complex already, this confuses the compiler to the point where
>> > it can no longer figure out if the variable is always initialized
>> > correctly:
>> >
>> > brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In function =E2=80=98brcmf_cfg80211_sta=
rt_ap=E2=80=99:
>> > brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:4586:10: error: =E2=80=98is_11d=E2=80=99=
 may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=3Dmaybe-uninitialized]
>> >
>> > This adds an initialization for the newly introduced case in which
>> > the variable should not really be used, in order to make the warning
>> > go away.
>> >
>> > Fixes: b3589dfe0212 ("brcmfmac: ignore 11d configuration errors")
>> > Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
>> > Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
>> > Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
>> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>=20
>> Via which tree are you planning to submit this? Should I take it?
>
> I'd prefer if you can take it and forward it along with your other
> bugfixes. I'll try to take care of the ones that nobody else
> picked up.

Ok, I'll take it. I'm planning to push this to 4.9.

--=20
Kalle Valo

Re: [19/28] brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> A bugfix added a sanity check around the assignment and use of the
> 'is_11d' variable, which looks correct to me, but as the function is
> rather complex already, this confuses the compiler to the point where
> it can no longer figure out if the variable is always initialized
> correctly:
> 
> brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c: In function ‘brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap’:
> brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:4586:10: error: ‘is_11d’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> 
> This adds an initialization for the newly introduced case in which
> the variable should not really be used, in order to make the warning
> go away.
> 
> Fixes: b3589dfe0212 ("brcmfmac: ignore 11d configuration errors")
> Cc: Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Patch applied to wireless-drivers.git, thanks.

d3532ea6ce4e brcmfmac: avoid maybe-uninitialized warning in brcmf_cfg80211_start_ap

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9380763/

Documentation about submitting wireless patches and checking status
from patchwork:

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches