[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210316142113.40fd721f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:21:13 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Voon Weifeng <weifeng.voon@...el.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Ong Boon Leong <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
Wong Vee Khee <vee.khee.wong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND v1 net-next 2/5] net: stmmac: make stmmac_interrupt()
function more friendly to MSI
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 20:18:20 +0800 Voon Weifeng wrote:
> + if (unlikely(!dev)) {
> + netdev_err(priv->dev, "%s: invalid dev pointer\n", __func__);
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> + }
Where did this check come from? Please avoid defensive programming
in the kernel unless you can point out how the condition can arise
legitimately.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists