On 6/7/23 16:55, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 11:04:05AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 5/25/23 15:00, Eric Blake wrote: >>> @@ -69,11 +75,18 @@ REPLY.STRUCTURED_REPLY.RECV_REMAINING: >>> REPLY.STRUCTURED_REPLY.CHECK: >>> struct command *cmd = h->reply_cmd; >>> uint16_t flags, type; >>> - uint32_t length; >>> + uint64_t length; >>> + uint64_t offset = -1; >> >> (6) I disagree with initializing the local variable "offset" here. >> >> Below (in the rest of REPLY.STRUCTURED_REPLY.CHECK), we only read >> "offset" back if "extended_headers" is set. But if "extended_headers" is >> set, we also store a value to "offset", before the read. >> >> Initializing "offset" to -1 suggests that the code might otherwise read >> an indeterminate value from "offset" -- but that's not the case. > > You may find that the compiler will give a warning. It's usually not > good about dealing with the case where a variable being initialized + > used depends on another variable being true.
Good point; that reminds me we used to encounter that issue specifically in IA32 edk2 builds, but only when using old gcc (RHEL-7 era, gcc-4.8.5). Of course it might still happen today. If that's the case, can we comment the code that we initialize "offset" for shutting up the compiler? Thanks! Laszlo _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list Libguestfs@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
