On Tue, 27 May 2014 10:36:10 -0700, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Grant, > > 2014-05-27 4:19 GMT-07:00 Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Fri, 23 May 2014 12:43:11 -0700, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Add an early check for the node argument in > >> of_get_next_available_child() to avoid dereferencing a NULL node pointer > >> a few lines after. > >> > >> CC: Daniel Mack <zonque@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Is there a bug that exposed this path? > > Daniel sent a patch recently [1] which makes us call > for_each_available_child_of_node() on a potentially NULL node > argument. And yet in your reply to that patch you argued that the NULL check should be in the caller! Anyway, this isn't a big deal. Post a patch fixing both and I'll apply it. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
