From: Tyrel Datwyler
> Sent: 27 January 2017 18:03
> On 01/26/2017 05:50 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 17:42 -0800, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> >> On 01/26/2017 12:22 PM, Michal Suchnek wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> building ibmvtpm I noticed gcc warning complaining that second word
> >>> of
> >>> struct ibmvtpm_crq in tpm_ibmvtpm_suspend is uninitialized.
> >>>
> >>> The structure is defined as
> >>>
> >>> struct ibmvtpm_crq {
> >>> u8 valid;
> >>> u8 msg;
> >>> __be16 len;
> >>> __be32 data;
> >>> __be64 reserved;
> >>> } __attribute__((packed, aligned(8)));
> >>>
> >>> initialized as
> >>>
> >>> struct ibmvtpm_crq crq;
> >>> u64 *buf = (u64 *) &crq;
> >>> ...
> >>> crq.valid = (u8)IBMVTPM_VALID_CMD;
> >>> crq.msg = (u8)VTPM_PREPARE_TO_SUSPEND;
> >>>
> >>> and submitted with
> >>>
> >>> rc = ibmvtpm_send_crq(ibmvtpm->vdev, cpu_to_be64(buf[0]),
> >>> cpu_to_be64(buf[1]));
Isn't the real fubar here the use of that memory layout structure at all?
It would probably all be better if the call looked like:
rc = ibmvtpm_send_crq(ibmvtpm->vdev, MAKE_REQ(IBMVTPM_VALID_CMD,
VTPM_PREPARE_TO_SUSPEND, xxx_len, xxx_data), 0);
and MAKE_REQ() did all the required endian independant shifts to generate
the correct 32bit value.
David
