Julia's patch to fix this shipped in Linux-2.6.32-rc7 cheers, Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center On Tue, 10 Nov 2009, Dan Carpenter wrote: > I moved the null dereference after the check. It is unlikely to make any > difference, but it's the right thing to do and it makes my static checker > happy. > > regards, > dan carpenter > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- orig/drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c 2009-11-08 19:26:09.000000000 +0200 > +++ devel/drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c 2009-11-08 19:27:10.000000000 +0200 > @@ -1133,15 +1133,15 @@ > int result = 0; > struct acpi_processor_throttling *pthrottling; > > + if (!pr) > + return -EINVAL; > + > ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO, > "pblk_address[0x%08x] duty_offset[%d] duty_width[%d]\n", > pr->throttling.address, > pr->throttling.duty_offset, > pr->throttling.duty_width)); > > - if (!pr) > - return -EINVAL; > - > /* > * Evaluate _PTC, _TSS and _TPC > * They must all be present or none of them can be used. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
