Re: [patch] cipso: remove an unneeded NULL check in cipso_v4_doi_add()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We dereference doi_def on the line before the NULL check.  It has
> been this way since 2008.  I checked all the callers and doi_def is
> always non-NULL here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c b/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
> index 2c2a98e..86f3b88 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/cipso_ipv4.c
> @@ -476,7 +476,7 @@ int cipso_v4_doi_add(struct cipso_v4_doi *doi_def,
>        doi = doi_def->doi;
>        doi_type = doi_def->type;
>
> -       if (doi_def == NULL || doi_def->doi == CIPSO_V4_DOI_UNKNOWN)
> +       if (doi_def->doi == CIPSO_V4_DOI_UNKNOWN)
>                goto doi_add_return;
>        for (iter = 0; iter < CIPSO_V4_TAG_MAXCNT; iter++) {
>                switch (doi_def->tags[iter]) {

I'd prefer to keep the NULL check in there as it does afford a little
bit of extra safety and this is management code after all, not
per-packet processing code, so the extra check should have no
observable performance impact.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux