Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: usif_ioctl: ensure returns are initialized

From: Ilia Mirkin
Date: Wed Jul 01 2015 - 12:56:52 EST


On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Colin King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Various usif_ioctl helper functions do not initialize the
> return variable ret and some of the error handling return
> paths just return garbage values that were on the stack (or
> in a register). I believe that in all the cases, the
> initial ret variable should be set to -EINVAL and subsequent
> paths through these helper functions set it appropriately
> otherwise.
>
> Found via static analysis using cppcheck:
>
> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:138]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret

It sure would seem that way, wouldn't it?

#define nvif_unpack(d,vl,vh,m) ({ \
if ((vl) == 0 || ret == -ENOSYS) { \
int _size = sizeof(d); \
if (_size <= size && (d).version >= (vl) && \
(d).version <= (vh)) { \
data = (u8 *)data + _size; \
size = size - _size; \
ret = ((m) || !size) ? 0 : -E2BIG; \
} else { \
ret = -ENOSYS; \
} \
} \
(ret == 0); \
})

So actually it does get initialized, and I guess cppcheck doesn't know
about macros?

> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:179]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret
> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:202]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret
> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:241]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret
> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:157]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret
> [drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c:288]:
> (error) Uninitialized variable: ret
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c
> index cb1182d..01b50a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_usif.c
> @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ usif_notify_new(struct drm_file *f, void *data, u32 size, void *argv, u32 argc)
> struct nvif_notify_req_v0 v0;
> } *req;
> struct usif_notify *ntfy;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> if (nvif_unpack(args->v0, 0, 0, true)) {
> if (usif_notify_find(f, args->v0.index))
> @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ usif_notify_del(struct drm_file *f, void *data, u32 size, void *argv, u32 argc)
> struct nvif_ioctl_ntfy_del_v0 v0;
> } *args = data;
> struct usif_notify *ntfy;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> if (nvif_unpack(args->v0, 0, 0, true)) {
> if (!(ntfy = usif_notify_find(f, args->v0.index)))
> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ usif_notify_get(struct drm_file *f, void *data, u32 size, void *argv, u32 argc)
> struct nvif_ioctl_ntfy_del_v0 v0;
> } *args = data;
> struct usif_notify *ntfy;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> if (nvif_unpack(args->v0, 0, 0, true)) {
> if (!(ntfy = usif_notify_find(f, args->v0.index)))
> @@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ usif_notify_put(struct drm_file *f, void *data, u32 size, void *argv, u32 argc)
> struct nvif_ioctl_ntfy_put_v0 v0;
> } *args = data;
> struct usif_notify *ntfy;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> if (nvif_unpack(args->v0, 0, 0, true)) {
> if (!(ntfy = usif_notify_find(f, args->v0.index)))
> @@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ usif_object_new(struct drm_file *f, void *data, u32 size, void *argv, u32 argc)
> struct nvif_ioctl_new_v0 v0;
> } *args = data;
> struct usif_object *object;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> if (!(object = kmalloc(sizeof(*object), GFP_KERNEL)))
> return -ENOMEM;
> --
> 2.1.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/