On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:44:35AM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote: > On 03/18/2013 04:02 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 11:36 +0000, Matt Fleming wrote: > >> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 08:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > >>> True. It probably doesn't *matter* because the size is zero so the > >>> firmware is just going to ignore the pointer anyway. Although in that > >>> case I wonder why we couldn't have just passed NULL. Perhaps we expected > >>> that some firmware might do some validation on the pointer before > >>> getting to the size check? > >> > >> I doubt that the firmware checks the validity of pci_handle when size is > >> zero, and I agree it's worth passing NULL to silence the warning (which > >> is also more explicit that just initialising pci_handle), unless Matthew > >> knows of a reason we shouldn't do that? > > > > No reason I can think of, and any failure will be pretty immediately > > obvious. > > Anyone want to submit a patch? > Sure. I'll send one tomorrow. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
