[Andrew Morton - Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 02:00:55PM -0800]
| On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:54:59 -0800 (PST)
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9564
| >
| > Summary: Uninitialzed variable fields cvt.h_margin and
| > cvt.v_margin
| > Product: Drivers
| > Version: 2.5
| > KernelVersion: 2.6.23
| > Platform: All
| > OS/Version: Linux
| > Tree: Mainline
| > Status: NEW
| > Severity: normal
| > Priority: P1
| > Component: Video(Other)
| > AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| >
| >
| > The errors can be found at drivers/video/fbcvt.c as follows:
| >
| > (1) the test "if (margin)" at line 310 evaluates to false,
| > (2) this makes the test "if (cvt.flags & FB_CVT_FLAG_MARGINS)" at line 352
| > to evaluate to false as well
| > (3) now cvt.h_margin is uninitialized at line 359, 368, and 370, and
| > cvt.v_margin is uninitizalied at line 371.
| >
| > In other words, both cvt.v_margin and cvt.h_margin are initialized
conditinally
| > but used unconditionally. This bug is a false positive only if the parameter
| > "margins" at line 304 is never 0. However, this would make the test at line
| > 310 unnecessary -- anyone looking at the code is miled into believing that
| > 0 is a legal value for "margins". This means the code does require some
change
| > in my humble opinion.
| >
|
| Could someone please take a look at this?
unfortunelly, it's not really obvious what is the right way of
calculation. *should* the 1.8% margin be involved in calculation
all the time or 0 is legal too?
- Cyrill -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
