The previous commit that made bits-per-word validation conditional
results in leaving no unconditional affectation of the status variable.

Since the variable is returned at the end of the function, initialize
it to avoid returning an undefined value.

Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com>
Fixes: b3fe2e516741 ("spi: core: Only check bits_per_word validity when explicitly provided")
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/spi/spi.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
index 563a56ce34a0..890ff46c784a 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
@@ -3475,7 +3475,7 @@ static int __spi_validate_bits_per_word(struct spi_controller *ctlr,
 int spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
 {
 	unsigned	bad_bits, ugly_bits;
-	int		status;
+	int		status = 0;
 
 	/*
 	 * Check mode to prevent that any two of DUAL, QUAD and NO_MOSI/MISO
-- 
2.35.1

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 10:40:40 +0200, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> The previous commit that made bits-per-word validation conditional
> results in leaving no unconditional affectation of the status variable.
> 
> Since the variable is returned at the end of the function, initialize
> it to avoid returning an undefined value.
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: core: Initialize returned status in spi_setup
      commit: 73f93db5c49b9f52c902e5dc6c750bf9832e0450

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark