* [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here
@ 2025-04-19 1:21 kernel test robot
2025-04-22 20:12 ` Nathan Chancellor
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2025-04-19 1:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Tinguely
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List,
Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Joseph Qi
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-nonmm-unstable
head: d1a9b961293d30be9a865d8685590635db282957
commit: 89e3e963129e945e0333e474709bde627b6a9cee [66/67] ocfs2: fix panic in failed foilio allocation
config: s390-randconfig-001-20250419 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
1133 | wc->w_folios[i] = NULL;
| ^
fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1101:12: note: initialize the variable 'i' to silence this warning
1101 | int ret, i;
| ^
| = 0
1 warning generated.
vim +/i +1133 fs/ocfs2/aops.c
1088
1089 /*
1090 * Prepare a single cluster for write one cluster into the file.
1091 */
1092 static int ocfs2_write_cluster(struct address_space *mapping,
1093 u32 *phys, unsigned int new,
1094 unsigned int clear_unwritten,
1095 unsigned int should_zero,
1096 struct ocfs2_alloc_context *data_ac,
1097 struct ocfs2_alloc_context *meta_ac,
1098 struct ocfs2_write_ctxt *wc, u32 cpos,
1099 loff_t user_pos, unsigned user_len)
1100 {
1101 int ret, i;
1102 u64 p_blkno;
1103 struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
1104 struct ocfs2_extent_tree et;
1105 int bpc = ocfs2_clusters_to_blocks(inode->i_sb, 1);
1106
1107 if (new) {
1108 u32 tmp_pos;
1109
1110 /*
1111 * This is safe to call with the page locks - it won't take
1112 * any additional semaphores or cluster locks.
1113 */
1114 tmp_pos = cpos;
1115 ret = ocfs2_add_inode_data(OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb), inode,
1116 &tmp_pos, 1, !clear_unwritten,
1117 wc->w_di_bh, wc->w_handle,
1118 data_ac, meta_ac, NULL);
1119 /*
1120 * This shouldn't happen because we must have already
1121 * calculated the correct meta data allocation required. The
1122 * internal tree allocation code should know how to increase
1123 * transaction credits itself.
1124 *
1125 * If need be, we could handle -EAGAIN for a
1126 * RESTART_TRANS here.
1127 */
1128 mlog_bug_on_msg(ret == -EAGAIN,
1129 "Inode %llu: EAGAIN return during allocation.\n",
1130 (unsigned long long)OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno);
1131 if (ret < 0) {
1132 mlog_errno(ret);
> 1133 wc->w_folios[i] = NULL;
1134 goto out;
1135 }
1136 } else if (clear_unwritten) {
1137 ocfs2_init_dinode_extent_tree(&et, INODE_CACHE(inode),
1138 wc->w_di_bh);
1139 ret = ocfs2_mark_extent_written(inode, &et,
1140 wc->w_handle, cpos, 1, *phys,
1141 meta_ac, &wc->w_dealloc);
1142 if (ret < 0) {
1143 mlog_errno(ret);
1144 goto out;
1145 }
1146 }
1147
1148 /*
1149 * The only reason this should fail is due to an inability to
1150 * find the extent added.
1151 */
1152 ret = ocfs2_get_clusters(inode, cpos, phys, NULL, NULL);
1153 if (ret < 0) {
1154 mlog(ML_ERROR, "Get physical blkno failed for inode %llu, "
1155 "at logical cluster %u",
1156 (unsigned long long)OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_blkno, cpos);
1157 goto out;
1158 }
1159
1160 BUG_ON(*phys == 0);
1161
1162 p_blkno = ocfs2_clusters_to_blocks(inode->i_sb, *phys);
1163 if (!should_zero)
1164 p_blkno += (user_pos >> inode->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits) & (u64)(bpc - 1);
1165
1166 for (i = 0; i < wc->w_num_folios; i++) {
1167 int tmpret;
1168
1169 /* This is the direct io target page. */
1170 if (wc->w_folios[i] == NULL) {
1171 p_blkno += (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT - inode->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits));
1172 continue;
1173 }
1174
1175 tmpret = ocfs2_prepare_folio_for_write(inode, &p_blkno, wc,
1176 wc->w_folios[i], cpos, user_pos, user_len,
1177 should_zero);
1178 if (tmpret) {
1179 mlog_errno(tmpret);
1180 if (ret == 0)
1181 ret = tmpret;
1182 }
1183 }
1184
1185 /*
1186 * We only have cleanup to do in case of allocating write.
1187 */
1188 if (ret && new)
1189 ocfs2_write_failure(inode, wc, user_pos, user_len);
1190
1191 out:
1192
1193 return ret;
1194 }
1195
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here
2025-04-19 1:21 [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here kernel test robot
@ 2025-04-22 20:12 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-04-23 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Chancellor @ 2025-04-22 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Mark Tinguely, llvm, oe-kbuild-all, kernel test robot,
Linux Memory Management List, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Joseph Qi
Hi Andrew,
On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 09:21:13AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-nonmm-unstable
> head: d1a9b961293d30be9a865d8685590635db282957
> commit: 89e3e963129e945e0333e474709bde627b6a9cee [66/67] ocfs2: fix panic in failed foilio allocation
> config: s390-randconfig-001-20250419 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/
>
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> >> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
> 1133 | wc->w_folios[i] = NULL;
> | ^
> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1101:12: note: initialize the variable 'i' to silence this warning
> 1101 | int ret, i;
> | ^
> | = 0
There appears to be something funky going on with "ocfs2: fix panic in
failed foilio allocation" in your tree, perhaps as a result of applying
v2 to mm-nonmm-unstable and v1 to mm-hotfixes-unstable? If you compare
https://git.kernel.org/akpm/mm/c/392a664f6d2740eeae23df0d29b56f444f558a7c
to https://lore.kernel.org/c879a52b-835c-4fa0-902b-8b2e9196dcbd@oracle.com/,
the second hunks do not match, which is what this is warning about. I
see this same warning in next-20250422.
Cheers,
Nathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here
2025-04-22 20:12 ` Nathan Chancellor
@ 2025-04-23 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
2025-04-23 14:13 ` [External] : " Mark Tinguely
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2025-04-23 0:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Chancellor
Cc: Mark Tinguely, llvm, oe-kbuild-all, kernel test robot,
Linux Memory Management List, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Joseph Qi
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 13:12:41 -0700 Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 09:21:13AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-nonmm-unstable
> > head: d1a9b961293d30be9a865d8685590635db282957
> > commit: 89e3e963129e945e0333e474709bde627b6a9cee [66/67] ocfs2: fix panic in failed foilio allocation
> > config: s390-randconfig-001-20250419 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
> > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
> >
> > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/
> >
> > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> > >> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
> > 1133 | wc->w_folios[i] = NULL;
> > | ^
> > fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1101:12: note: initialize the variable 'i' to silence this warning
> > 1101 | int ret, i;
> > | ^
> > | = 0
>
> There appears to be something funky going on with "ocfs2: fix panic in
> failed foilio allocation" in your tree, perhaps as a result of applying
> v2 to mm-nonmm-unstable and v1 to mm-hotfixes-unstable? If you compare
> https://git.kernel.org/akpm/mm/c/392a664f6d2740eeae23df0d29b56f444f558a7c
> to https://lore.kernel.org/c879a52b-835c-4fa0-902b-8b2e9196dcbd@oracle.com/,
> the second hunks do not match, which is what this is warning about. I
> see this same warning in next-20250422.
Thanks. Confirms that the universe is a plot to confuse akpm.
I dropped everything and remerged the v2 patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [External] : Re: [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here
2025-04-23 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2025-04-23 14:13 ` Mark Tinguely
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mark Tinguely @ 2025-04-23 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, Nathan Chancellor
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, kernel test robot,
Linux Memory Management List, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Joseph Qi
On 4/22/25 7:55 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 13:12:41 -0700 Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 09:21:13AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>>> tree: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTnhBAaPs$ mm-nonmm-unstable
>>> head: d1a9b961293d30be9a865d8685590635db282957
>>> commit: 89e3e963129e945e0333e474709bde627b6a9cee [66/67] ocfs2: fix panic in failed foilio allocation
>>> config: s390-randconfig-001-20250419 (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/config__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTvSadMWN$ )
>>> compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTvn1221-$ f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
>>> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250419/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/reproduce__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTuWmwFGg$ )
>>>
>>> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
>>> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
>>> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>> | Closes: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504190950.rq1NDlDz-lkp@intel.com/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTgKlYSkL$
>>>
>>> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>>>
>>>>> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
>>> 1133 | wc->w_folios[i] = NULL;
>>> | ^
>>> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1101:12: note: initialize the variable 'i' to silence this warning
>>> 1101 | int ret, i;
>>> | ^
>>> | = 0
>>
>> There appears to be something funky going on with "ocfs2: fix panic in
>> failed foilio allocation" in your tree, perhaps as a result of applying
>> v2 to mm-nonmm-unstable and v1 to mm-hotfixes-unstable? If you compare
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/akpm/mm/c/392a664f6d2740eeae23df0d29b56f444f558a7c__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTnnwerZK$
>> to https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/c879a52b-835c-4fa0-902b-8b2e9196dcbd@oracle.com/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NYsFjZmx0oSNmGPOQ57M8FqiwN9x_0uNHOsZ0H_bxMZw11U8F1-i2FIS7wctmB4sSockZwPpufGxuROeTnn7W1rC$ ,
>> the second hunks do not match, which is what this is warning about. I
>> see this same warning in next-20250422.
>
> Thanks. Confirms that the universe is a plot to confuse akpm.
>
> I dropped everything and remerged the v2 patch.
>
Thank-you for remerging the patch.
I did see the automaic tool complaint and I visually verified the
indexes and discredited the complaint.
--Mark Tinguely
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-04-23 14:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-04-19 1:21 [akpm-mm:mm-nonmm-unstable 66/67] fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1133:17: warning: variable 'i' is uninitialized when used here kernel test robot
2025-04-22 20:12 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-04-23 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
2025-04-23 14:13 ` [External] : " Mark Tinguely
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox