On Sat, 2017-09-23 at 17:57 +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Currently p->phy is being null checked in several places to avoid
> null pointer dereferences on p->phy, however, the final call
> to phy_attached_info on p->phy when p->phy will perform a null
> pointer dereference. Fix this by simply moving the call into
> the previous code block that is only executed if p->phy is
> not null.
>
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1457034 ("Dereference after null check")
>
> Fixes: 2220943a21e2 ("phy: Centralise print about attached phy")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/dsa/slave.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/dsa/slave.c b/net/dsa/slave.c
> index 02ace7d462c4..29ab4e98639b 100644
> --- a/net/dsa/slave.c
> +++ b/net/dsa/slave.c
> @@ -1115,10 +1115,9 @@ static int dsa_slave_phy_setup(struct net_device *slave_dev)
> of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(port_dn);
> return ret;
> }
> + phy_attached_info(p->phy);
> }
>
> - phy_attached_info(p->phy);
> -
> return 0;
> }
Huh? Why move this into the test?
The test of the block above this change is
if (!p->phy) {
Perhaps this should be
'
if (p->phy)
phy_attached_info(p->phy);
or simpler
} else {
phy_attached_info(p->phy);
}
or maybe reverse the block
if (p->phy) {
phy_attached_info(p->phy);
} else {
ret = dsa_slave_phy_connect(slave_dev, p->dp->index);
if (ret) {
netdev_err(slave_dev, "failed to connect to port %d: %d\n",
p->dp->index, ret);
if (phy_is_fixed)
of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(port_dn);
return ret;
}
}
return 0;
}
--
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
