[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B1AEFE97C@HASMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 21:14:44 +0000
From: "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [char-misc-next 1/8] mei: debugfs: validate dev is not null
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 07:16:07AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:05:36PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > > > make static analyzer happy
> > >
> > > That's a stupid analyzer.
> > >
> > > Sorry, this case can never be true, so don't check for it. Fix your
> > > analyzer.
> > >
> > > > and validate dev argument before dereferencing
> > >
> > > Again, no need to do so, it's always set properly.
> > >
> > > sorry, I can't take this.
> >
> > Fair enough, I didn't like that patch myself now I have other confirmation that
> this is stupid.
>
> This is about the 10th time I have gotten patches that are somehow being
> _forced_ by Intel developers to submit, and require me to say they are
> stupid and wrong and push back on.
>
> Someone needs to go stop that Intel code analyzer and push back on them
> directly, don't rely on me being the one to do this, it only makes me
> grumpy and mad when you all make me do your job on this :(
>
These tools and BKMs have a lot of false alarms, but sometimes they hit the nail.
It was just my personal bad call, to send this patch out.
But I really don't know about others, Intel is a big company.
Thanks
Tomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists