lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 8 May 2020 16:58:38 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <>,
        Maor Gottlieb <>,,
        Mark Bloch <>,
        Mark Zhang <>,,
        Saeed Mahameed <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v1 1/4] {IB/net}/mlx5: Simplify don't trap code

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:30:09AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> +	flow_act->action &=
> +	flow_act->action |= MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST;
> +	handle = _mlx5_add_flow_rules(ft, spec, flow_act, dest, num_dest);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(handle))
> +		goto unlock;

I never like seeing IS_ERR_OR_NULL()..

In this case I see callers of mlx5_add_flow_rules() that crash if it
returns NULL, so this can't be right.

Also, I don't see an obvious place where _mlx5_add_flow_rules()
returns NULL, does it?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists