Re: [PATCH 09/10] treewide: Remove uninitialized_var() usage

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 07:59:40AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:23:06AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 04:32:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > Using uninitialized_var() is dangerous as it papers over real bugs[1]
> > > (or can in the future), and suppresses unrelated compiler warnings
> > > (e.g. "unused variable"). If the compiler thinks it is uninitialized,
> > > either simply initialize the variable or make compiler changes.
> > > 
> > > I preparation for removing[2] the[3] macro[4], remove all remaining
> > > needless uses with the following script:
> > > 
> > > git grep '\buninitialized_var\b' | cut -d: -f1 | sort -u | \
> > > 	xargs perl -pi -e \
> > > 		's/\buninitialized_var\(([^\)]+)\)/\1/g;
> > > 		 s:\s*/\* (GCC be quiet|to make compiler happy) \*/$::g;'
> > > 
> > > drivers/video/fbdev/riva/riva_hw.c was manually tweaked to avoid
> > > pathological white-space.
> > > 
> > > No outstanding warnings were found building allmodconfig with GCC 9.3.0
> > > for x86_64, i386, arm64, arm, powerpc, powerpc64le, s390x, mips, sparc64,
> > > alpha, and m68k.
> > 
> > At least in the infiniband part I'm confident that old gcc versions
> > will print warnings after this patch.
> > 
> > As the warnings are wrong, do we care? Should old gcc maybe just -Wno-
> > the warning?
> 
> I *think* a lot of those are from -Wmaybe-uninitialized, but Linus just
> turned that off unconditionally in v5.7:
> 78a5255ffb6a ("Stop the ad-hoc games with -Wno-maybe-initialized")

Yah, that alone is justification enough to do this purge.

Jason