[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220315092656-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:28:36 -0400
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: trix@...hat.com
Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, nathan@...nel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
lingshan.zhu@...el.com, sgarzare@...hat.com,
xieyongji@...edance.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vDPA/ifcvf: match pointer check to use
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 05:41:30AM -0700, trix@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
>
> Clang static analysis reports this issue
> ifcvf_main.c:49:4: warning: Called function
> pointer is null (null dereference)
> vf->vring->cb.callback(vring->cb.private);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> The check
> vring = &vf->vring[i];
> if (vring->cb.callback)
>
> Does not match the use. Change dereference so they match.
>
> Fixes: 79333575b8bd ("vDPA/ifcvf: implement shared IRQ feature")
Thanks a lot! I squashed this into the offending patch - no point in
breaking bisect. Pushed to linux. However I'm now
having second thoughts about applying that patchset - I'd like
soma analysis explaining how this got through testing.
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> index 3b48e717e89f7..4366320fb68d3 100644
> --- a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ static irqreturn_t ifcvf_vqs_reused_intr_handler(int irq, void *arg)
> for (i = 0; i < vf->nr_vring; i++) {
> vring = &vf->vring[i];
> if (vring->cb.callback)
> - vf->vring->cb.callback(vring->cb.private);
> + vring->cb.callback(vring->cb.private);
> }
>
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> --
> 2.26.3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists