[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100910.133255.137830993.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: error27@...il.com
Cc: ramkrishna.vepa@...r.com, sivakumar.subramani@...r.com,
sreenivasa.honnur@...r.com, jon.mason@...r.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] vxge: potential NULL dereference
From: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:54:23 +0200
> At the start of the function we test whether the "vpath" is NULL but we
> need another test here as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
> ---
> This is a static checker bug, I'm not sure if we ever pass a NULL
> pointer for "vpath".
I cannot see any case where this can happen. There are two
cases:
1) __vxge_hw_vpath_alarm_process() is invoked via vxge_hw_device_begin_irq(),
which looks like:
ret = __vxge_hw_vpath_alarm_process(
&hldev->virtual_paths[i], skip_alarms);
that vpath pointer first argument will never be NULL.
2) __vxge_hw_vpath_alarm_process() is invoked via vxge_hw_vpath_alarm_process()
which uses:
status = __vxge_hw_vpath_alarm_process(vp->vpath, skip_alarms);
All vpath valid active vpath handles always have a non-NULL vp->vpath
virtual path back pointer, as setup by vxge_hw_vpath_open():
...
vp->vpath = vpath;
...
*vpath_handle = vp;
attr->fifo_attr.userdata = vpath->fifoh;
attr->ring_attr.userdata = vpath->ringh;
return VXGE_HW_OK;
So we can simply remove the first NULL check as this can never actually
be NULL.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists