@@ -77,7 +77,9 @@ void nft_fib4_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, struct nft_regs *regs,
};
const struct net_device *oif;
struct net_device *found;
+#ifdef CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH
int i;
+#endif
/*
* Do not set flowi4_oif, it restricts results (for example, asking
@@ -90,6 +92,8 @@ void nft_fib4_eval(const struct nft_expr *expr, struct nft_regs *regs,
oif = pkt->out;
else if (priv->flags & NFTA_FIB_F_IIF)
oif = pkt->in;
+ else
+ return;
if (pkt->hook == NF_INET_PRE_ROUTING && fib4_is_local(pkt->skb)) {
nft_fib_store_result(dest, priv->result, pkt, LOOPBACK_IFINDEX);
The newly added nft fib code produces two warnings: net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_fib_ipv4.c: In function 'nft_fib4_eval': net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_fib_ipv4.c:80:6: error: unused variable 'i' [-Werror=unused-variable] net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_fib_ipv4.c: In function ‘nft_fib4_eval’: net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_fib_ipv4.c:137:6: error: ‘oif’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] The first one is obvious as the only user of that variable is inside of an #ifdef, but the second one is a bit trickier. It is clear that 'oif' is uninitialized here if neither NFTA_FIB_F_OIF nor NFTA_FIB_F_IIF are set. I have no idea how that should be handled, this patch just returns without doing anything, which may or may not be the right thing to do. Fixes: 84f5eedb983e ("netfilter: nf_tables: add fib expression") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_fib_ipv4.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) -- 2.9.0