Re: usb/serial/io_ti.c: inconsequent NULL checking

2008-02-22 Thread Alan Cox
> Either the test of port->tty here is unneeded: > > if (port->tty) >port->tty->low_latency = low_latency; > > ...or the lack of test of port->tty here is a mistake: > >edge_set_termios (port, port->tty->termios); Interesting - so coverity doesn't understand the BKL. It

Re: usb/serial/io_ti.c: inconsequent NULL checking

2008-02-19 Thread Ray Lee
On Feb 19, 2008 3:25 PM, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 12:49:15AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > The Coverity checker spotted the following inconsequent NULL checking > > introduced by commit d5f5bcd425b771c0b7ff5a650b2ce061ac8bbb87: > > > > <-- snip --> > > It's not

Re: usb/serial/io_ti.c: inconsequent NULL checking

2008-02-19 Thread Greg KH
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 12:49:15AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > The Coverity checker spotted the following inconsequent NULL checking > introduced by commit d5f5bcd425b771c0b7ff5a650b2ce061ac8bbb87: > > <-- snip --> It's not a real problem, that pointer can't go away. thanks, greg k-h -- To u

usb/serial/io_ti.c: inconsequent NULL checking

2008-02-19 Thread Adrian Bunk
The Coverity checker spotted the following inconsequent NULL checking introduced by commit d5f5bcd425b771c0b7ff5a650b2ce061ac8bbb87: <-- snip --> static int edge_open (struct usb_serial_port *port, struct file * filp) { ... if (port->tty) <