Variables declared in a switch statement before any case statements
cannot be automatically initialized with compiler instrumentation (as
they are not part of any execution flow). With GCC's proposed automatic
stack variable initialization feature, this triggers a warning (and they
don't get initialized). Clang's automatic stack variable initialization
(via CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL=y) doesn't throw a warning, but it also
doesn't initialize such variables[1]. Note that these warnings (or silent
skipping) happen before the dead-store elimination optimization phase,
so even when the automatic initializations are later elided in favor of
direct initializations, the warnings remain.
To avoid these problems, move such variables into the "case" where
they're used or lift them up into the main function body.
arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c: In function ‘xen_write_msr_safe’:
arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c:904:12: warning: statement will never be executed [-Wswitch-unreachable]
904 | unsigned which;
| ^~~~~
[1] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44916
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
index 1f756ffffe8b..789dc12b7962 100644
--- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
@@ -896,14 +896,15 @@ static u64 xen_read_msr_safe(unsigned int msr, int *err)
static int xen_write_msr_safe(unsigned int msr, unsigned low, unsigned high)
{
int ret;
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+ unsigned which;
+ u64 base;
+#endif
ret = 0;
switch (msr) {
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
- unsigned which;
- u64 base;
-
case MSR_FS_BASE: which = SEGBASE_FS; goto set;
case MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE: which = SEGBASE_GS_USER; goto set;
case MSR_GS_BASE: which = SEGBASE_GS_KERNEL; goto set;
On 20.02.20 07:23, Kees Cook wrote:
> Variables declared in a switch statement before any case statements
> cannot be automatically initialized with compiler instrumentation (as
> they are not part of any execution flow). With GCC's proposed automatic
> stack variable initialization feature, this triggers a warning (and they
> don't get initialized). Clang's automatic stack variable initialization
> (via CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL=y) doesn't throw a warning, but it also
> doesn't initialize such variables[1]. Note that these warnings (or silent
> skipping) happen before the dead-store elimination optimization phase,
> so even when the automatic initializations are later elided in favor of
> direct initializations, the warnings remain.
>
> To avoid these problems, move such variables into the "case" where
> they're used or lift them up into the main function body.
>
> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c: In function ‘xen_write_msr_safe’:
> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c:904:12: warning: statement will never be executed [-Wswitch-unreachable]
> 904 | unsigned which;
> | ^~~~~
>
> [1] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44916
>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
Juergen
On 2/20/20 1:37 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 20.02.20 07:23, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Variables declared in a switch statement before any case statements
>> cannot be automatically initialized with compiler instrumentation (as
>> they are not part of any execution flow). With GCC's proposed automatic
>> stack variable initialization feature, this triggers a warning (and they
>> don't get initialized). Clang's automatic stack variable initialization
>> (via CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL=y) doesn't throw a warning, but it also
>> doesn't initialize such variables[1]. Note that these warnings (or
>> silent
>> skipping) happen before the dead-store elimination optimization phase,
>> so even when the automatic initializations are later elided in favor of
>> direct initializations, the warnings remain.
>>
>> To avoid these problems, move such variables into the "case" where
>> they're used or lift them up into the main function body.
>>
>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c: In function ‘xen_write_msr_safe’:
>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c:904:12: warning: statement will never be
>> executed [-Wswitch-unreachable]
>> 904 | unsigned which;
>> | ^~~~~
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44916
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>
> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
>
Applied to for-linus-5.6.
(I replaced 'unsigned' with 'unsigned int' to quiet down checkpatch )
-boris
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 11:33:41AM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
>
> On 2/20/20 1:37 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> > On 20.02.20 07:23, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> Variables declared in a switch statement before any case statements
> >> cannot be automatically initialized with compiler instrumentation (as
> >> they are not part of any execution flow). With GCC's proposed automatic
> >> stack variable initialization feature, this triggers a warning (and they
> >> don't get initialized). Clang's automatic stack variable initialization
> >> (via CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL=y) doesn't throw a warning, but it also
> >> doesn't initialize such variables[1]. Note that these warnings (or
> >> silent
> >> skipping) happen before the dead-store elimination optimization phase,
> >> so even when the automatic initializations are later elided in favor of
> >> direct initializations, the warnings remain.
> >>
> >> To avoid these problems, move such variables into the "case" where
> >> they're used or lift them up into the main function body.
> >>
> >> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c: In function ‘xen_write_msr_safe’:
> >> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c:904:12: warning: statement will never be
> >> executed [-Wswitch-unreachable]
> >> 904 | unsigned which;
> >> | ^~~~~
> >>
> >> [1] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44916
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
> >
>
> Applied to for-linus-5.6.
>
> (I replaced 'unsigned' with 'unsigned int' to quiet down checkpatch )
Oh, good call. Sorry I missed that!
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook