On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 01:23:05PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 01:01:19PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > This warning is false-positive, because @old equals NULL iff
> > @memcg_nr_cache_ids equals 0.
>
> I don't see how it could be a false positive. The "old" pointer is
> dereferenced inside the call to memset() so unless memset is a macro the
> compiler isn't going to optimize the dereference away.
old->entries is not dereferenced: memcg_cache_array->entries is not a
pointer - it is embedded to the memcg_cache_array struct.
>
>
> //----- test code
>
> void frob(void *p){}
>
> struct foo {
> int *x, *y, *z;
> };
>
> int main(void)
> {
> struct foo *x = NULL;
>
> frob(x->y);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> //---- end
>
>
> If we compile with gcc test.c then it segfaults. With -02 the compiler
> is able to tell that frob() is an empty function and it doesn't
> segfault. In the kernel code, there is no way for the compiler to
> optimize the memset() away so it will Oops.
Just change
- int *x, *y, *z;
+ int *x, *z;
+ int *y[0];
and it won't.
Thanks,
Vladimir
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>