On 2024-04-11 Nam Cao wrote: > On 11/Apr/2024 Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > method_flags may be passed uninitialized to bootflow_iter_set_dev() > > if dev is not NULL. > > > > Always initialize method_flags. > > > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 467057 Uninitialized scalar variable > > Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com> > > Reviewed-by: Nam Cao <nam...@linutronix.de>
Wait hold up. I was curious about the Addresses-Coverity-ID thing at looked it up. And I discovered that this patch was sent a few months a ago already [1]. What's the story here? Why is this patch resent? There was a test failure report the last time this patch was sent, has that been resolved yet? Best regards, Nam [1] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20240118173802.GA2695740@bill-the-cat/T/ > > --- > > boot/bootflow.c | 4 +--- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/boot/bootflow.c b/boot/bootflow.c > > index 68bf99329ab..f659a414c79 100644 > > --- a/boot/bootflow.c > > +++ b/boot/bootflow.c > > @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static int iter_incr(struct bootflow_iter *iter) > > if (iter->flags & BOOTFLOWIF_SINGLE_DEV) { > > ret = -ENOENT; > > } else { > > - int method_flags; > > + int method_flags = 0; > > > > ret = 0; > > dev = iter->dev; > > @@ -263,7 +263,6 @@ static int iter_incr(struct bootflow_iter *iter) > > } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BOOTSTD_FULL) && > > iter->flags & BOOTFLOWIF_SINGLE_MEDIA) { > > log_debug("next in single\n"); > > - method_flags = 0; > > do { > > /* > > * Move to the next bootdev child of this media > > @@ -305,7 +304,6 @@ static int iter_incr(struct bootflow_iter *iter) > > } > > } else { > > ret = bootdev_next_prio(iter, &dev); > > - method_flags = 0; > > } > > } > > log_debug("ret=%d, dev=%p %s\n", ret, dev, >
