[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized
Gabriel L. Somlo
Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable
Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:36:14 -0400
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:12:53PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 02:40:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't
> > ^ ^
> > If returns
> > > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug.
> > In principle I'm OK with being cautious and initializing local
> > variables just in case, but I'm curious:
> > acpi_acquire_global_lock() (and its friend, acpi_release_global_lock())
> > are both wrapped inside the same macro -- ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS
> > -- which either makes them both do something useful, or makes them both
> > no-ops returning a hardcoded AE_NOT_CONFIGURED.
> > So what else do you think could be a way to get very unlucky ?
> If "glk" happened to to equal acpi_gbl_global_lock_handle by chance
> then we would release it without acquiring it first. Actually I could
> initialize it to zero and that would be better, no?
No, because acpi_release_global_lock() would also be a hard-coded
"return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED" by the same macro which also hard-coded
acpi_acquire_global_lock() to be "return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED" in the
first place. See include/acpi/acpixf.h, search for the two occurrences
and then for:
further down in the file.
Whether both (or neither) of lock/unlock are for real or just
hardcoded to return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED depends on ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE,
which I assume is also set when there's *no* ACPI hardware at all.
But I don't believe it's possible for "unlock" to do anything at all
if "lock" was hardcoded to simply return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED.
Then again, it's possible I'm still missing something :)