On 05/20/2014 03:07 AM, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> There is otherwise a risk of a possible null pointer dereference.
>
> Was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> sound/soc/samsung/dma.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/samsung/dma.c b/sound/soc/samsung/dma.c
> index dc09b71..1d9bcaa 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/samsung/dma.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/samsung/dma.c
> @@ -115,17 +115,19 @@ static void dma_enqueue(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
> static void audio_buffdone(void *data)
> {
> struct snd_pcm_substream *substream = data;
> - struct runtime_data *prtd = substream->runtime->private_data;
> + struct runtime_data *prtd = NULL;
I am not sure if this check is required as audio_buffdone() is set as a
callback function with known valid parameter during dma_enqueue().
>
> pr_debug("Entered %s\n", __func__);
>
> - if (prtd->state & ST_RUNNING) {
> + if (substream)
> + prtd = substream->runtime->private_data;
> +
> + if (prtd && prtd->state & ST_RUNNING) {
ditto as above
> prtd->dma_pos += prtd->dma_period;
> if (prtd->dma_pos >= prtd->dma_end)
> prtd->dma_pos = prtd->dma_start;
>
> - if (substream)
> - snd_pcm_period_elapsed(substream);
> + snd_pcm_period_elapsed(substream);
This check certainly can be removed as snd_pcm_period_elapsed() also
checks the validity of the argument.
--
Tushar Behera
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
