From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-8fa8.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-8fa8.mail.infomaniak.ch [83.166.143.168]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A72374FD7B9 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 13:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.166.143.168 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789739742; cv=none; b=mFYN3OxBwpc8Oai7aNcOkxiT3NgGxD2HoJFwxIe+O3YkGXEcoN2WzIOTJyA9ouj/mEX68FRx4RQeFgRC9YQeuIfZFQ7HINvyxisfX+WW7ap4Dc9THmz8WLLlrSBKDzdGcvBAsLFDcbxLblVlJXqJmcz/C4iphfZL50/y+x88Xuk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789739742; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OLlEp6HiPmwteNgpfFgTSKTzyM8Nd7EDQkX9u/GVDkk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AI5xIxCuaJBTeRi8FH+CI4hVAPEIHsg/mgyEfFosINx4LKCys0Q5xjN0XvBagqu7k08h3Hh1whCHAXT0kUACesUOv+Gt8Ka1txAW62NrC+4K3yw5ZhJGRb6OTZhniDdJRkBvKUbGxUazFqVFsZwKyix64sLPClqleX19iJyDiQg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=digikod.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=digikod.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=digikod.net header.i=@digikod.net header.b=FcAacEes; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.166.143.168 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=digikod.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=digikod.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=digikod.net header.i=@digikod.net header.b="FcAacEes" Received: from smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (unknown [IPv6:2001:1600:4:17::246b]) by smtp-3-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4hmYzm4znGzgVg; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:55:32 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=digikod.net; s=20191114; t=1789739732; bh=T3ufC42INIwJA1Uj+mhYOs+cNe4p+Da6IX2vT85Vehc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FcAacEeshC0N0Z15PbH5Egdfd10dMLo+C+BJK+ltSZ7oaVRnSSmjtc9SZQQcHWpo0 3NtEltXmOXnGlaMd7Q7ypZip1lveJXZmV+S+tiEOfnSSH/fS34KleTVTEuD5zMIl1v x2XiZmVJ0E/kXzciICx9Q8O0Qnt/6z/h2Y4DVomE= Received: from unknown by smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4hmYzk6hXgzcy2; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:55:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:55:26 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Arnd Bergmann , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Tingmao Wang , Justin Suess , =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=BCnther?= Noack , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] landlock: work around gcc-16 -Wuninitialized warning Message-ID: <20260918.dofeC7vahHai@digikod.net> References: <20260915201036.3527935-1-arnd@kernel.org> <20260916084947.6QDy8KZQ@linutronix.de> <20260916.shai0tha3IPa@digikod.net> <57b5869d-7411-46e8-ade6-6d2a7fea02ac@app.fastmail.com> <20260917070915.Ix8TOn5Y@linutronix.de> <1192c2df-d39a-4d43-ad57-68b0167759f5@app.fastmail.com> <20260917104544.3trW9Jq1@linutronix.de> <95e794f6-6ec4-4b3e-bfa8-7edae0ac898e@app.fastmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <95e794f6-6ec4-4b3e-bfa8-7edae0ac898e@app.fastmail.com> X-Infomaniak-Routing: alpha On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 01:36:15PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2026, at 12:45, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2026-09-17 12:26:17 [+0200], Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> I checked again and found that this is a config that did produce > >> the issue a few weeks ago, but doesn't today for me. > >> I found a different config from this week and managed to reproduce > >> the problem on today's linux-next using both gcc-16.2 and gcc-17.0 > >> from yesterday, so there is still a related issue that is not > >> fixed in gcc, even though one at least one of them was fixed. > > > > Confirmed. I see the warning on arm64 while x86-64 is quiet. The patch > > fixes the issue. > > > > You might need to update gcc bug tracker. > > Correction: I noticed the failing gcc-17 binary was an old one, > the current snapshot does not produce the warning any more. > It does seem like the fix was not yet backported to older compilers, > and seeing that the final gcc-13.x was released, we will > continue to need the kernel workaround. I assume the compiler > fix will eventually make its way into the other stable branches. Ok, thanks for the investigation, I plan to sent a PR next week. Mickaël