Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] mm/zpool: allow NULL `zpool' pointer in zpool_destroy_pool()

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 08:58 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (06/10/15 16:59), Dan Streetman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:04 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky
> > <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > zpool_destroy_pool() does not tolerate a NULL zpool pointer
> > > argument and performs a NULL-pointer dereference. Although
> > > there is only one zpool_destroy_pool() user (as of 4.1),
> > > still update it to be coherent with the corresponding
> > > destroy() functions of the remainig pool-allocators (slab,
> > > mempool, etc.), which now allow NULL pool-pointers.
> > >
> > > For consistency, tweak zpool_destroy_pool() and NULL-check the
> > > pointer there.
> > >
> > > Proposed by Andrew Morton.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > LKML-reference: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/8/583
> > 
> > Acked-by: Dan Streetman <ddstreet@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Shall we ask Joe to add zpool_destroy_pool() to the
> "$func(NULL) is safe and this check is probably not required" list?

[]

Is it really worth it?

There isn't any use of zpool_destroy_pool preceded by an if
There is one and only one use of zpool_destroy_pool.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/