On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 11:40:55PM +0100, Bean Huo wrote:
> From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Compilation complains that two possible variables are used without
> initialization:
>
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c:112:6: warning: variable 'sg_cnt' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c:112:6: warning: variable 'sg_list' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
>
> Fix both warnings by adding initialization with sg_cnt = 0, sg_list = NULL.
>
> Fixes: 6ff265fc5ef6 ("scsi: ufs: core: bsg: Add advanced RPMB support in ufs_bsg")
> Signed-off-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Xiaosen He <quic_xiaosenh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for the patch!
Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>
We also got a report from KernelCI:
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/63be5f73.170a0220.16f9f.8b91@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Reported-by: kernelci.org bot <bot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> index 0044029bcf7b..0d38e7fa34cc 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c
> @@ -70,9 +70,9 @@ static int ufs_bsg_exec_advanced_rpmb_req(struct ufs_hba *hba, struct bsg_job *j
> struct ufs_rpmb_reply *rpmb_reply = job->reply;
> struct bsg_buffer *payload = NULL;
> enum dma_data_direction dir;
> - struct scatterlist *sg_list;
> + struct scatterlist *sg_list = NULL;
> int rpmb_req_type;
> - int sg_cnt;
> + int sg_cnt = 0;
> int ret;
> int data_len;
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
>
