On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:57 PM Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 09:03:34AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:30 AM Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > v2: > > > - more special-cased fixes > > > - add reviews > > > v1: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200603233203.1695403-1-keesc...@chromium.org > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > As recommended[2] by[3] Linus[4], remove the macro. > > > > > > Most of the 300 uses don't cause any warnings on gcc 9.3.0, so they're in > > > a single treewide commit in this series. A few others needed to actually > > > get cleaned up, and I broke those out into individual patches. > > > > > > The tree is: > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git/log/?h=kspp/uninit/macro > > > > > > -Kees > > > > > > > Hi Kees, > > > > thanks for doing a v2 of your patchset. > > > > As I saw Jason Yan providing some "uninitialized_var() macro" patches > > to the MLs I pointen him to your tree "v1". > > Thanks! > > > BTW, I have tested your "v1" against Linux v5.7 (see [1]) - just > > yesterday with Linux v5.7.5-rc1. > > > > Is it possible to have a v2 of this patchset on top od Linux v5.7 - if > > you do not mind. > > Since it's only going to be for post-v5.8, I'm fine skipping the v5.7 > testing. Mainly I'm looking at v5.8 and linux-next. > > Thanks for looking at it! >
Thanks for the feedback. "I knew you'd say that." ( Judge Dredd ) - Sedat -
