On 6 August 2017 at 17:56, Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar > <mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to assert that in the C code there was no attempt to >> access uninitialized value. If you have a look at the original report >> here: >> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparse&m=149070715427276&w=2 >> >> You will see that the C code assigns a value to the field before >> attempting to access it as shown below. >> >> s3.onebit = 1; >> if(s3.onebit != 1){ >> } > > True but this should be solved by patch b1672eab399fdce2c050e8aa07767489a2071981 > available since -rc1. > Isn't it the case? > Wouldn't have thought so - as the variable is not initialized at the point of declaration. The assignment occurs after declaring the struct variable s3. I haven't tried that patch though. Regards Dibyendu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
