[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260109090227.GA48150@wp.pl>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 10:02:27 +0100
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@...pl>
To: Tuo Li <islituo@...il.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: iwlegacy: 3945-rs: add a defensive WARN_ON_ONCE
for il_sta in il3945_rs_get_rate()
Hi Tuo,
On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 11:40:14AM +0800, Tuo Li wrote:
> In this function, il_sta is not expected to be NULL. Add a defensive
> WARN_ON_ONCE() to catch this unexpected condition and aid debugging.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tuo Li <islituo@...il.com>
> ---
> v3:
> * Replace plain NULL check with WARN_ON_ONCE() and update subject to better
> reflect defensive nature of the check.
> Thanks to Johannes Berg and Stanislaw Gruszka for helpful advice.
> v2:
> * Return early for uninitialized STA il data and align D_RATE messages with
> il3945_rs_tx_status(). Add a wifi: prefix to the patch title.
> Thanks to Stanislaw Gruszka for the helpful advice.
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c
> index 1826c37c090c..463565ce14af 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c
> @@ -626,6 +626,9 @@ il3945_rs_get_rate(void *il_r, struct ieee80211_sta *sta, void *il_sta,
>
> D_RATE("enter\n");
>
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!il_sta))
> + return;
> +
Sorry for giving you wrong advice before, but after examining related code
I agree with Johannes the il_sta can not be NULL.
Now, I think we should just remove il_sta/rs_sta pointer check.
Regards
Stanislaw
Powered by blists - more mailing lists