On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 15:30 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> It's not the return where we should trigger the warning it's at the
> 
>       rcu_assign_pointer(sta->ampdu_mlme.tid_rx[tid], tid_agg_rx);
> 
> line.  That's for correctness, but also it should be slightly easier.
> Or it should cut down on false positives if we ignored returns and
> only looked global scope type assignements.

That's a good idea! But even that will probably get you a lot of false
positives. For example, in this structure, the rcu_head is never
initialized until we need it for kfree_rcu() or call_rcu(). I'm sure
there are other places like it.

johannes

Reply via email to