[ Kees, why am I getting tons and tons of these warnings? Are we not
going to initialize things manually any more? ]
Hello Sargun Dhillon,
The patch 186f03857c48: "seccomp: Add find_notification helper" from
Jun 1, 2020, leads to the following static checker warning:
kernel/seccomp.c:1124 seccomp_notify_recv()
error: uninitialized symbol 'knotif'.
kernel/seccomp.c
1091 static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter,
1092 void __user *buf)
1093 {
1094 struct seccomp_knotif *knotif, *cur;
^^^^^^
This used to be initialized to NULL here.
1095 struct seccomp_notif unotif;
1096 ssize_t ret;
1097
1098 /* Verify that we're not given garbage to keep struct extensible. */
1099 ret = check_zeroed_user(buf, sizeof(unotif));
1100 if (ret < 0)
1101 return ret;
1102 if (!ret)
1103 return -EINVAL;
1104
1105 memset(&unotif, 0, sizeof(unotif));
1106
1107 ret = down_interruptible(&filter->notif->request);
1108 if (ret < 0)
1109 return ret;
1110
1111 mutex_lock(&filter->notify_lock);
1112 list_for_each_entry(cur, &filter->notif->notifications, list) {
1113 if (cur->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_INIT) {
1114 knotif = cur;
^^^^^^^^^^^^
1115 break;
1116 }
1117 }
1118
1119 /*
1120 * If we didn't find a notification, it could be that the task was
1121 * interrupted by a fatal signal between the time we were woken and
1122 * when we were able to acquire the rw lock.
1123 */
1124 if (!knotif) {
^^^^^^
But now it's uninitialized.
1125 ret = -ENOENT;
1126 goto out;
1127 }
1128
1129 unotif.id = knotif->id;
regards,
dan carpenter
