From: Benjamin Block <bblock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 484647088826f2f651acbda6bcf9536b8a466703 ]
GCC v9 emits this warning:
CC drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.o
drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c: In function 'zfcp_erp_action_enqueue':
drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c:217:26: warning: 'erp_action' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
217 | struct zfcp_erp_action *erp_action;
| ^~~~~~~~~~
This is a possible false positive case, as also documented in the GCC
documentations:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wmaybe-uninitialized
The actual code-sequence is like this:
Various callers can invoke the function below with the argument "want"
being one of:
ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_ADAPTER,
ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT_FORCED,
ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT, or
ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_LUN.
zfcp_erp_action_enqueue(want, ...)
...
need = zfcp_erp_required_act(want, ...)
need = want
...
maybe: need = ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT
maybe: need = ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_ADAPTER
...
return need
...
zfcp_erp_setup_act(need, ...)
struct zfcp_erp_action *erp_action; // <== line 217
...
switch(need) {
case ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_LUN:
...
erp_action = &zfcp_sdev->erp_action;
WARN_ON_ONCE(erp_action->port != port); // <== access
...
break;
case ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT:
case ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT_FORCED:
...
erp_action = &port->erp_action;
WARN_ON_ONCE(erp_action->port != port); // <== access
...
break;
case ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_ADAPTER:
...
erp_action = &adapter->erp_action;
WARN_ON_ONCE(erp_action->port != NULL); // <== access
...
break;
}
...
WARN_ON_ONCE(erp_action->adapter != adapter); // <== access
When zfcp_erp_setup_act() is called, 'need' will never be anything else
than one of the 4 possible enumeration-names that are used in the
switch-case, and 'erp_action' is initialized for every one of them, before
it is used. Thus the warning is a false positive, as documented.
We introduce the extra if{} in the beginning to create an extra code-flow,
so the compiler can be convinced that the switch-case will never see any
other value.
BUG_ON()/BUG() is intentionally not used to not crash anything, should
this ever happen anyway - right now it's impossible, as argued above; and
it doesn't introduce a 'default:' switch-case to retain warnings should
'enum zfcp_erp_act_type' ever be extended and no explicit case be
introduced. See also v5.0 commit 399b6c8bc9f7 ("scsi: zfcp: drop old
default switch case which might paper over missing case").
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Block <bblock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jens Remus <jremus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Steffen Maier <maier@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
index ebdbc457003f..332701db7379 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
+++ b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#define pr_fmt(fmt) KMSG_COMPONENT ": " fmt
#include <linux/kthread.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
#include "zfcp_ext.h"
#include "zfcp_reqlist.h"
@@ -238,6 +239,12 @@ static struct zfcp_erp_action *zfcp_erp_setup_act(int need, u32 act_status,
struct zfcp_erp_action *erp_action;
struct zfcp_scsi_dev *zfcp_sdev;
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(need != ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_LUN &&
+ need != ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT &&
+ need != ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_PORT_FORCED &&
+ need != ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_ADAPTER))
+ return NULL;
+
switch (need) {
case ZFCP_ERP_ACTION_REOPEN_LUN:
zfcp_sdev = sdev_to_zfcp(sdev);
--
2.20.1
