On 4/30/20 10:13 AM, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:14 AM CEST, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
Some versions of GCC falsely detect that vi might not be initialized. That's
not true, but let's silence it with NULL initialization.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andr...@fb.com>
---
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index d86ff8214b96..977add1b73e2 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -5003,8 +5003,8 @@ static int bpf_object__collect_map_relos(struct
bpf_object *obj,
GElf_Shdr *shdr, Elf_Data *data)
{
int i, j, nrels, new_sz, ptr_sz = sizeof(void *);
+ const struct btf_var_secinfo *vi = NULL;
const struct btf_type *sec, *var, *def;
- const struct btf_var_secinfo *vi;
const struct btf_member *member;
struct bpf_map *map, *targ_map;
const char *name, *mname;
Alternatively we could borrow the kernel uninitialized_var macro:
include/linux/compiler-clang.h:#define uninitialized_var(x) x = *(&(x))
include/linux/compiler-gcc.h:#define uninitialized_var(x) x = x
We could do that potentially, at least to mark such locations explicitly,
although I wonder if it's not more churn than anything else adding the
infra for it. But generally no objections from my side.
Anyway, applied this one, thanks!
