Fix a few uninitialized variables

[cpaelzer]

Hi,
while collecting some stable fixes for Ubuntu I found one patch that - AFAICS - wasn't upstreamed yet.
But I think these changes make sense to the project in general just as much.
Therefore I've prepared those for your consideration.

I kept Authorship info intact (= @vorlonofportland) but signed-off myself as I reworked them to match your commit styles.

P.S. I haven't found these as issues or open PRs nor in any recent branches. If I just missed them I beg your pardon and feel free to close.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2471

• 2 of 2 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
• 5 unchanged lines in 2 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.01%) to 77.46%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
src/tpm2/crypto/openssl/Helpers.c	2	90.23%
src/tpm12/tpm_ticks.c	3	91.97%

Totals
Change from base Build 2439:	-0.01%
Covered Lines:	29211
Relevant Lines:	37711

---

💛 - Coveralls

[stefanberger]

Thanks for the PR. I would say both of these are false positives and I think we should mark them as such in the patch title. The title of the patches should probably be: Initialize variables due to gcc complaint (s390x, false positive)

[cpaelzer]

Thanks for the PR. I would say both of these are false positives and I think we should mark them as such in the patch title. The title of the patches should probably be: Initialize variables due to gcc complaint (s390x, false positive)

Done and pushed to my proposed branch.

Thanks for the quick review!

[stefanberger]

@cpaelzer Do you still need to apply these 2 patches? I am asking because I don't need to apply them when building for my Ubuntu PPA for Bionic, Focal, and Jammy. So maybe gcc for s390x has been improved in the meantime.

[cpaelzer]

@cpaelzer Do you still need to apply these 2 patches? I am asking because I don't need to apply them when building for my Ubuntu PPA for Bionic, Focal, and Jammy. So maybe gcc for s390x has been improved in the meantime.

Hi @stefanberger, indeed I haven't checked that before.

If I read the history correctly the bad gcc was at the late days of Impish which is still out there and makes it worth to keep the changes merged either way.

But on your hint I was dropping it from my 0.9.3 merge and rebuilt on all platforms - indeed for Jammy I was able to drop it without consequence.

[stefanberger]

The question is whether to backport them to 0.9.x to allow it to build without having to apply these patches. I guess you would want me to apply them to stable-0.9.