On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 09:32:38AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:16:55AM +0530, Devesh Sharma wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:15 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello Devesh Sharma, > > > > > > The patch 37cb11acf1f7: "RDMA/bnxt_re: Add SRQ support for Broadcom > > > adapters" from Jan 11, 2018, leads to the following static checker > > > warning: > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/ib_verbs.c:1317 bnxt_re_destroy_srq() > > > warn: 'srq->umem' isn't an ERR_PTR > > > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/ib_verbs.c > > > 1313 dev_err(rdev_to_dev(rdev), "Destroy HW SRQ failed!"); > > > 1314 return rc; > > > 1315 } > > > 1316 > > > 1317 if (srq->umem && !IS_ERR(srq->umem)) > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > We never store error pointers to srq->umem. It's pretty consistently > > > checked for error pointers though so maybe that's fine. It causes a > > > static checker warning because error pointer confusion is a pretty > > > common source of bugs. Anyway, feel free to ignore if you want... > > Thanks for reporting Dan, > > > > Is there a way out, I want to call ib_umem_release only if it was valid. > > I think if ib_umem_release checks for the validity of pointer then I > > can get rid of this? > > There are other places also in bnxt_re driver where such checks are present. > > Yeah. Those places generate warnings as well, but I thought one was > enough. It's fine if you want to ignore the warning, no one will be > upset. :P Not really, we are trying to clean the subsystem from the warnings and driver authors who ignore such warnings simply and very effective sabotage it. Currently my checks print ~400 warnings for the drivers/infiniband/* + drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/* So please don't increase this number, or fix the driver or fix the tool :) Thanks
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
