Hi Maxim, On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 11:20, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 06:57:00PM +0600, Maxim Uvarov wrote: > > Add additional checks for NULL pointers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> > > --- > > drivers/net/sandbox.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/sandbox.c b/drivers/net/sandbox.c > > index 13022addb6..75d32db3a9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/sandbox.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/sandbox.c > > @@ -65,6 +65,9 @@ int sandbox_eth_arp_req_to_reply(struct udevice *dev, > > void *packet, > > struct ethernet_hdr *eth_recv; > > struct arp_hdr *arp_recv; > > > > + if (!priv) > > + return -EAGAIN; > > + > > if (ntohs(eth->et_protlen) != PROT_ARP) > > return -EAGAIN; > > This part seems fine. > > > @@ -82,6 +85,8 @@ int sandbox_eth_arp_req_to_reply(struct udevice *dev, > > void *packet, > > > > /* Formulate a fake response */ > > eth_recv = (void *)priv->recv_packet_buffer[priv->recv_packets]; > > + if (!eth_recv) > > + return -EAGAIN; > > memcpy(eth_recv->et_dest, eth->et_src, ARP_HLEN); > > memcpy(eth_recv->et_src, priv->fake_host_hwaddr, ARP_HLEN); > > eth_recv->et_protlen = htons(PROT_ARP); > > How do we get to this dereference, and is that not a bug in the caller?
I wonder if somehow the device has not been probed yet? Regards, Simon