On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 05:44:55PM +0530, Sebin Sebastian wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:24:07AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 01:37:25PM +0530, SebinSebastian wrote:
> > > Fix coverity warning dereferencing before null check. _ep and desc is
> > > dereferenced on all paths until the check for null. Move the
> > > initializations after the check for null.
> > > Coverity issue: 1518209
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: SebinSebastian <mailmesebin00@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed_udc.c | 9 +++++----
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed_udc.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed_udc.c
> > > index d75a4e070bf7..96f8193fca15 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed_udc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed_udc.c
> > > @@ -341,10 +341,6 @@ static void ast_udc_stop_activity(struct ast_udc_dev *udc)
> > > static int ast_udc_ep_enable(struct usb_ep *_ep,
> > > const struct usb_endpoint_descriptor *desc)
> > > {
> > > - u16 maxpacket = usb_endpoint_maxp(desc);
> > > - struct ast_udc_ep *ep = to_ast_ep(_ep);
> > > - struct ast_udc_dev *udc = ep->udc;
> > > - u8 epnum = usb_endpoint_num(desc);
> > > unsigned long flags;
> > > u32 ep_conf = 0;
> > > u8 dir_in;
> > > @@ -356,6 +352,11 @@ static int ast_udc_ep_enable(struct usb_ep *_ep,
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + u16 maxpacket = usb_endpoint_maxp(desc);
> > > + struct ast_udc_ep *ep = to_ast_ep(_ep);
> > > + struct ast_udc_dev *udc = ep->udc;
> > > + u8 epnum = usb_endpoint_num(desc);
> > > +
> > > if (!udc->driver) {
> > > EP_DBG(ep, "bogus device state\n");
> > > return -ESHUTDOWN;
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
> > a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
> > to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
> > writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
> > created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
> > in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
> > kernel tree.
> >
> > You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
> > as indicated below:
> >
> > - Your patch breaks the build.
> >
> > - Your patch contains warnings and/or errors noticed by the
> > scripts/checkpatch.pl tool.
> >
> > - This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
> > did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
> > Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
> > kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what needs to be done
> > here to properly describe this.
> >
> > If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
> > how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
> > Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
> > from other developers.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h's patch email bot
>
> I am sorry to keep on bothering with this incorrect patches. I am
> running the checkpatch script everytime before I sent any patches. It is
> not showing any warnings or errors. Is it because of my name that my
> patches are getting rejected? I can see a space missing.
Did you test build your patch? If not, why not?
thanks,
greg k-h
