Re: [PATCH][RESEND] Semi-pointless NULL test in uli526x driver

[Jesper Juhl]

On 07/08/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > (resending previously submitted patch from 16/7-2007 22:40)
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In drivers/net/tulip/uli526x.c::uli526x_interrupt() there's a test
> > of the function argument 'void *dev_id' against NULL. But that
> > test is pretty pointless, since if ever 'dev_id' is NULL we'll
> > already have crashed inside "netdev_priv(dev)".
> >
> > I don't think dev_id can ever actually be NULL, so the whole block
> > inside "if (!dev) {" could probably just go away. But I guess
> > there's a good reason someone put that ULI526X_DBUG() in there - and
> > if 'dev_id' /can/ actually be NULL then it's nice to have and in
> > that case this patch actually fixes a possible crash (hence the
> > version number update).
> > So I guess that in this case we should just move the
> > "db = netdev_priv(dev)" assignment past that NULL test. That's what
> > this patch does.
> >
> > Found by the Coverity checker.
> > Compile tested.
> >
> >
> > PS. Please keep me on Cc when replying.
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Just remove the dev==NULL test...
>

Hmm, it would seem there's some disagreement about that :

On 04/08/07, Kyle McMartin <kyle@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
>
> It *can* be null, in the case of another handler being registered on the
> same irq number, passing NULL for the cookie.
>
> Ack. Will apply.
>
> Regards,
>         Kyle
>

I'll let you and Kyle fight it out :-)

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
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/