Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] bonding: uninitialized variable in bond_miimon_inspect()

From: Dan Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:40:35 +0300

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 05:36:41PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:15:39PM +0530, Pavan Chebbi wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 4:36 PM Dan Carpenter <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >
> > > The "ignore_updelay" variable needs to be initialized to false.
> > >
> > > Fixes: f8a65ab2f3ff ("bonding: fix link recovery in mode 2 when updelay is nonzero")
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <[email-masked]>
> > > ---
> > > v2: Re-order so the declarations are in reverse Christmas tree order
> > >
> > Thanks,
> > Reviewed-by: Pavan Chebbi <[email-masked]>
> > 
> > > Don't forget about:
> > > drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5071 bond_update_slave_arr() warn: missing error code here? 'bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info()' failed. 'ret' = '0'
> > >
> > 
> > I think that warning can be ignored, as bond_update_slave_arr() does
> > consider the return value of bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info() but
> > chooses to not bubble it up. Though the author of the function is the
> > best person to answer it, at this point, it looks OK to me. Maybe a
> > separate patch to address it would help to get the attention of the
> > author.
> 
> Heh...  That's slightly vague.
> 
> You're wrong to say that none of the callers care about the error code.
> It is checked in bond_slave_arr_handler().

If you don't know that's fine also...  All the maintainers are CC'd.  If
they really care they can take a look otherwise there are so many other
obvious bugs to care about and this is very minor.

regards,
dan carpenter