Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190221222123.GC6474@magnolia> <alpine.LSU.2.11.1902222222570.1594@eggly.anvils>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1902222222570.1594@eggly.anvils>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 25 Feb 2019 11:53:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgO3MPjPpf_ARyW6zpwwPZtxXYQgMLbmj2bnbOLnR+6Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix uninitialized return value in shmem_link
To:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Matej Kupljen <matej.kupljen@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 10:35 PM Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:
>
> When we made the shmem_reserve_inode call in shmem_link conditional, we
> forgot to update the declaration for ret so that it always has a known
> value.  Dan Carpenter pointed out this deficiency in the original patch.

Applied.

Side note: how come gcc didn't warn about this? Yes, we disable that
warning for some cases because of lots of false positives, but I
thought the *default* setup still had it.

Is it just that the goto ends up confusing gcc enough that it never notices?

                Linus