On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 11:06 +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:48:58AM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote:
> >
> > Remove NULL pointer dereference as it results in undefined
> > behaviour, and will usually lead to a runtime error.
> The diff does not show any pointer dereference so it is hard to
> understand what you are trying to do
> with this patch.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > b/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > index b88b0e8..5bb8f98 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > @@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ static void _rtl_txrate_selectmode(struct
> > ieee80211_hw *hw,
> >
> > struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = rtl_priv(hw);
> > struct rtl_mac *mac = rtl_mac(rtl_priv(hw));
> > - struct rtl_sta_info *sta_entry = NULL;
> > + struct rtl_sta_info *sta_entry;
> Now the pointer just has garbage in it instead of the testable value
> of NULL. If you are concerned
> with the dereference perhaps you could add a NULL check, again it's
> hard to say without seeing the
> code.
Hello,
Thanks for making me understand.
Here is the code after declaration and initialization of sta_entry.
Will it be good to add a NULL check in this case?
struct rtl_sta_info *sta_entry = NULL;
u8 ratr_index = SET_RATE_ID(RATR_INX_WIRELESS_MC);
if (sta) {
sta_entry = (struct rtl_sta_info *)sta->drv_priv;
ratr_index = sta_entry->ratr_index;
}
If we are making a pointer point to NULL then what if any other
variable is already pointing to NULL for some other purpose.
Instead, removing initialization will be good right?
>
> It is hard to see how this patch is correct though.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Tobin.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
