On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:02:45AM +0100, Ian Abbott wrote: > On 2013-08-20 10:00, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >"devpriv" is non-NULL at this point. We dereference it earlier in the > >function and the inconsistent checking upsets static checkers. We don't > >need to check "devpriv->sprivs" because kfree() accepts NULL pointers. > > > >Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/pcmuio.c b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/pcmuio.c > >index f942455..a779062 100644 > >--- a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/pcmuio.c > >+++ b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/pcmuio.c > >@@ -676,8 +676,7 @@ static void pcmuio_detach(struct comedi_device *dev) > > if (devpriv->asics[i].irq) > > free_irq(devpriv->asics[i].irq, dev); > > } > >- if (devpriv && devpriv->sprivs) > >- kfree(devpriv->sprivs); > >+ kfree(devpriv->sprivs); > > comedi_legacy_detach(dev); > > } > > > > > > Actually, the function is buggy anyway as devpriv might be NULL > (pcmuio_detach() is called even if pcmuio_attach() returns an > error). > > So let's drop this patch and I'll post a patch to fix the bug. Ah. Sorry about that. Thanks for catching this. regards, dan carpenter -- 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
