On 11/15/24 9:07 AM, Suraj Sonawane wrote:
> On 08/10/24 23:22, SurajSonawane2415 wrote:
>> Fix the uninitialized symbol 'bio' in the function blk_rq_prep_clone
>> to resolve the following error:
>> block/blk-mq.c:3199 blk_rq_prep_clone() error: uninitialized symbol 'bio'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: SurajSonawane2415 <surajsonawane0215@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> V1 - Initialize 'bio' to NULL.
>> V2 - Move bio_put(bio) into the bio_ctr error handling block,
>> ensuring memory cleanup occurs only when the bio_ctr fail.
>> V3 - Moved the bio declaration into the loop scope, eliminating
>> the need to set it to NULL at the end of the loop.
>> V4 - Adjusted position of arguments of bio_alloc_clone.
>>
>> block/blk-mq.c | 13 ++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
>> index 4b2c8e940..89c9a6c4d 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
>> @@ -3156,19 +3156,21 @@ int blk_rq_prep_clone(struct request *rq, struct request *rq_src,
>> int (*bio_ctr)(struct bio *, struct bio *, void *),
>> void *data)
>> {
>> - struct bio *bio, *bio_src;
>> + struct bio *bio_src;
>> if (!bs)
>> bs = &fs_bio_set;
>> __rq_for_each_bio(bio_src, rq_src) {
>> - bio = bio_alloc_clone(rq->q->disk->part0, bio_src, gfp_mask,
>> - bs);
>> + struct bio *bio = bio_alloc_clone(rq->q->disk->part0, bio_src,
>> + gfp_mask, bs);
>> if (!bio)
>> goto free_and_out;
>> - if (bio_ctr && bio_ctr(bio, bio_src, data))
>> + if (bio_ctr && bio_ctr(bio, bio_src, data)) {
>> + bio_put(bio);
>> goto free_and_out;
>> + }
>> if (rq->bio) {
>> rq->biotail->bi_next = bio;
>> @@ -3176,7 +3178,6 @@ int blk_rq_prep_clone(struct request *rq, struct request *rq_src,
>> } else {
>> rq->bio = rq->biotail = bio;
>> }
>> - bio = NULL;
>> }
>> /* Copy attributes of the original request to the clone request. */
>> @@ -3196,8 +3197,6 @@ int blk_rq_prep_clone(struct request *rq, struct request *rq_src,
>> return 0;
>> free_and_out:
>> - if (bio)
>> - bio_put(bio);
>> blk_rq_unprep_clone(rq);
>> return -ENOMEM;
>
> Hello Jens!
>
> I wanted to follow up on this patch I submitted. I have done all the
> suggested changes till v4. I was wondering if you had a chance to
> review it and if there are any comments or feedback.
Sorry missed this one. Is this a legit case of it being used
uninitialized, or is it just cleaning up the code so that smatch is
happy? The commit is woefully non-descriptive, unfortunately. So perhaps
resend this one and improve the commit message.
--
Jens Axboe
