In the very unlikely chance that a seq_operations didn't get initialized, we wouldn't want them calling some random location. As a first example user of __require_explicit_initialization, annotate them so a missing initializer is a compile-time warning.
Every seq_operations in the tree already sets all four, so no new warnings are added. Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]> --- include/linux/seq_file.h | 13 +++++++++---- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/seq_file.h b/include/linux/seq_file.h index dc0e8c62d9e0..f0e7e52a0905 100644 --- a/include/linux/seq_file.h +++ b/include/linux/seq_file.h @@ -28,11 +28,16 @@ struct seq_file { void *private; }; +/* All four are called without checking for NULL. */ struct seq_operations { - void * (*start) (struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos); - void (*stop) (struct seq_file *m, void *v); - void * (*next) (struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos); - int (*show) (struct seq_file *m, void *v); + void *(*start)(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos) + __require_explicit_initialization; + void (*stop)(struct seq_file *m, void *v) + __require_explicit_initialization; + void *(*next)(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos) + __require_explicit_initialization; + int (*show)(struct seq_file *m, void *v) + __require_explicit_initialization; }; #define SEQ_SKIP 1 -- 2.55.0
