On 07/12/06, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Coverity checker spotted the following inconsequent NULL checking
introduced by commit f1d3d38af75789f1b82969b83b69cab540609789:
-- snip --
...
static struct cphy *my3126_phy_create(adapter_t *adapter,
int phy_addr, struct mdio_ops *mdio_ops)
{
struct cphy *cphy = kzalloc(sizeof (*cphy), GFP_KERNEL);
if (cphy)
cphy_init(cphy, adapter, phy_addr, my3126_ops, mdio_ops);
INIT_WORK(cphy-phy_update, my3216_poll, cphy);
cphy-bmsr = 0;
return (cphy);
}
...
-- snip --
It doesn't make sense to first check whether cphy is NULL and
dereference it unconditionally later.
How about simply changing
if (cphy)
cphy_init(cphy, adapter, phy_addr, my3126_ops, mdio_ops);
into
if (!cphy)
return NULL;
callers need to be able to handle that ofcourse, but I haven't checked that yet.
--
Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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 netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html