On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 11:30:56PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 05:17:21PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >if
> > >Reply-To:
> > >
> > >The Coverity checker correctly noted that this condition can't ever be
> > >fulfilled.
> > >
> > >Can someone understanding this code check whether my guess what this
> > >should have been was right?
> > >
> > >Or should the if get completely dropped?
> > >
> > >Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > >--- linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm1-full/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c.old 2005-03-22
> > >21:41:37.000000000 +0100
> > >+++ linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm1-full/drivers/net/wireless/airo.c 2005-03-22
> > >21:42:01.000000000 +0100
> > >@@ -3440,9 +3440,6 @@
> > > /* Make sure we got something */
> > > if (rxd.rdy && rxd.valid == 0) {
> > > len = rxd.len + 12;
> > >- if (len < 12 && len > 2048)
> > >- goto badrx;
> >
> > Coverity is silly.
> >
> > len is signed, and so can obviously be less than zero in edge cases. I
> > don't see where the "> 2048" test is invalid, either.
>
> But if it's less than zero it can't be > 2048 at the same time?
>
> The point is: len can't be both < 12 and > 2048 at the same time.
>
>
> Is this "if" simply superfluous?
> Or should the && be an || ?
Yes, it looks like it should be "||".
Jeff
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
