From: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <somlo@cmu.edu>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:36:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160414193614.GE7821@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160414191253.GH4247@mwanda>
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:12:53PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 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?
No, because acpi_release_global_lock() would also be a hard-coded
"return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED" by the same macro which also hard-coded
acpi_acquire_global_lock() to be "return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED" in the
first place. See include/acpi/acpixf.h, search for the two occurrences
of
"#define ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS"
and then for:
"global_lock"
further down in the file.
Whether both (or neither) of lock/unlock are for real or just
hardcoded to return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED depends on ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE,
which I assume is also set when there's *no* ACPI hardware at all.
But I don't believe it's possible for "unlock" to do anything at all
if "lock" was hardcoded to simply return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED.
Then again, it's possible I'm still missing something :)
Thanks,
--Gabe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-14 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-14 9:33 [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable Dan Carpenter
2016-04-14 18:40 ` Gabriel L. Somlo
2016-04-14 19:12 ` Dan Carpenter
2016-04-14 19:36 ` Gabriel L. Somlo [this message]
2016-04-14 20:05 ` Dan Carpenter
2016-04-14 19:51 ` Gabriel L. Somlo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160414193614.GE7821@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU \
--to=somlo@cmu.edu \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).