Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 13:59 +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > f300bab "nfsd41: sunrpc: add new xprt class for nfsv4.1 backchannel" > > introduced an error case branch that lacks an actual `return' keyword > > before the return value. Add it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <jw@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Alexandros Batsakis <batsakis@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > --- a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c > > +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c > > @@ -2444,7 +2444,7 @@ static struct rpc_xprt *xs_setup_bc_tcp( > > struct svc_sock *bc_sock; > > > > if (!args->bc_xprt) > > - ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > > > xprt = xs_setup_xprt(args, xprt_tcp_slot_table_entries); > > if (IS_ERR(xprt)) > > No. It should either be a BUG_ON(), or else be removed entirely. > Returning an error value for something that is clearly a programming bug > is not a particularly useful exercise... > Removing NULL check is wrong because it will NULL pointer dereference later. Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Jani Nikula wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <ext-jani.1.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > NOTE: I'm afraid I'm unable to test this; please consider this more a > > bug report than a complete patch. > > --- > Indeed, it has to be "return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);". > Otherwise, it will trigger NULL pointer dereference some lines later. > > bc_sock = container_of(args->bc_xprt, struct svc_sock, sk_xprt); > bc_sock->sk_bc_xprt = xprt; > > This bug was introduced by f300baba5a1536070d6d77bf0c8c4ca999bb4f0f > "nfsd41: sunrpc: add new xprt class for nfsv4.1 backchannel" and > exists in 2.6.32 and later. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
