On 2/11/2025 4:19 PM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 2/11/2025 4:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:23:54AM +0100, Marijn Suijten wrote:
On 2025-02-10 14:14:14, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 2/9/2025 7:51 PM, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
There is a possibility for an uninitial
On 2/11/2025 4:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:23:54AM +0100, Marijn Suijten wrote:
On 2025-02-10 14:14:14, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 2/9/2025 7:51 PM, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be
returned in some cod
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:23:54AM +0100, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> On 2025-02-10 14:14:14, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2/9/2025 7:51 PM, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
> > > There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be
> > > returned in some code paths.
> > >
> > > Fix th
On 2025-02-10 14:14:14, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On 2/9/2025 7:51 PM, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
> > There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be
> > returned in some code paths.
> >
> > Fix this by initializing *ret* to 0.
> >
> > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1642546 ("Uniniti
On 2/9/2025 7:51 PM, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be
returned in some code paths.
Fix this by initializing *ret* to 0.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1642546 ("Uninitialized scalar variable")
Fixes: 774bcfb731765d ("drm/msm/dpu: add suppor
On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 10:51:54PM -0500, Ethan Carter Edwards wrote:
> There is a possibility for an uninitialized *ret* variable to be
> returned in some code paths.
>
> Fix this by initializing *ret* to 0.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1642546 ("Uninitialized scalar variable")
> Fixes: 774bcfb731
