Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
ecryptfs: Fix up bad backport of fe2e082
When doing the 4.9 merge into certain Android trees, I noticed a warning from Android's deprecated GCC 4.9.4, which causes a build failure in those trees due to basically -Werror: fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c: In function 'ecryptfs_parse_packet_set': fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1357:2: warning: 'auth_tok_list_item' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] memset(auth_tok_list_item, 0, ^ fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1260:38: note: 'auth_tok_list_item' was declared here struct ecryptfs_auth_tok_list_item *auth_tok_list_item; ^ GCC 9.2.0 was not able to pick up this warning when I tested it. Turns out that Clang warns as well when -Wuninitialized is used, which is not the case in older stable trees at the moment (but shows value in potentially backporting the various warning fixes currently in upstream to get more coverage). fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1284:6: warning: variable 'auth_tok_list_item' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is true [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] if (data[(*packet_size)++] != ECRYPTFS_TAG_1_PACKET_TYPE) { ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1360:4: note: uninitialized use occurs here auth_tok_list_item); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1284:2: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always false if (data[(*packet_size)++] != ECRYPTFS_TAG_1_PACKET_TYPE) { ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c:1260:56: note: initialize the variable 'auth_tok_list_item' to silence this warning struct ecryptfs_auth_tok_list_item *auth_tok_list_item; ^ = NULL 1 warning generated. Somehow, commit fe2e082 ("ecryptfs: fix a memory leak bug in parse_tag_1_packet()") upstream was not applied in the correct if block in 4.4.215, 4.9.215, and 4.14.172, which will indeed lead to use of uninitialized memory. Fix it up by undoing the bad backport in those trees then reapplying the patch in the proper location. Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
- Loading branch information