lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1] xfs: initialize error in xfs_defer_finish_one
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:42:21PM +0000, Sherry Yang wrote:
>
> > On Aug 2, 2022, at 9:31 PM, Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > 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.
>
> Hi Darrick,
>
> You’re correct. This is a false positive bug detected by our static code
> analysis tool. Sorry for the noise.

Well, thank /you/ for running smatch/sparse/whatever on the XFS code
base. Let us know if you find any other oddities, since it does tend to
find things every now and then. :)

--D

> Sherry
> >
> > --D
> >
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Dave.
> >> --
> >> Dave Chinner
> >> david@fromorbit.com
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-04 07:07    [W:0.309 / U:0.384 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site