On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 06:49:02AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 12:03:11PM -0700, Sherry Yang wrote: > > Path through non-void function 'xfs_defer_finish_one' may return error > > uninitialized if no iteration of 'list_for_each_safe' occurs. Fix this > > by initializing error. > > I didn't think this situation was possible - how do we get deferred > work queued with no work items on it? > > If we can return an uninitialised error from xfs_defer_finish_one() > because of an empty queued work, then something else has gone wrong > earlier in the work deferral process. If this can actually happen, > then we need to fix whatever is creating the empty work rather than > paper over it by initialising the error being returned for empty > works... /me bets this is a response to a static checker that doesn't know that list_empty(&dfp->dfp_work) == false in all circumstances. It's not possible for tp->t_dfops to contain an xfs_defer_pending with no work items. --D > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
