The NULL check was done to late, and there it was a risk of a possible null pointer dereference. This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck. Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h index 84defce..00e1361 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h @@ -165,12 +165,14 @@ static inline int update_get_reply_buf(struct update_reply *reply, void **buf, int result; ptr = update_get_buf_internal(reply, index, &size); + + LASSERT((ptr != NULL && size >= sizeof(int))); + result = *(int *)ptr; if (result < 0) return result; - LASSERT((ptr != NULL && size >= sizeof(int))); *buf = ptr + sizeof(int); return size - sizeof(int); } -- 1.7.10.4 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
