On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 02:43:14PM +0000, Jim Lin wrote: > On Fri, 2022-09-09 at 07:38 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 01:56:15AM +0800, Jim Lin wrote: > > > NULL check is performed after params->dev is dereferenced in > > > dev_get_stats. > > > > I do not understand this statement. > > > > > Fixed by adding a NULL check before dereferencing params->dev and > > > removing subsequent NULL checks for it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Aniruddha TVS Rao <anrao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Jim Lin <jilin@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/gadget/function/rndis.c | 37 ++++++++++++------------- > > > ---- > > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/rndis.c > > > b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/rndis.c > > > index 64de9f1b874c..d2f18f34c8e5 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/rndis.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/rndis.c > > > @@ -198,6 +198,9 @@ static int gen_ndis_query_resp(struct > > > rndis_params *params, u32 OID, u8 *buf, > > > outbuf = (__le32 *)&resp[1]; > > > resp->InformationBufferOffset = cpu_to_le32(16); > > > > > > + if (!params->dev) > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > + > > > > As Sergey points out, this check is useless and the ones below should > > also be removed. > > > > But, why make this check at all, how did you trigger a problem with > > the > > current code? > > > > Are you using this driver? If so, why? It is totally broken (as per > > the specification) and we really really need to just delete it from > > the > > tree to prevent anyone else from ever using it. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > Thanks for review, please ignore this patch. > Issue was triggered by our internal tool (probably not smart enough, > and cause false alarm). Ah, so that means I HAVE to reject it as you did not properly follow the requirements when you use tools like this. Please read Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst for how to do this properly. That is now a requirement to make it so that we are not the ones doing the debugging of random tools like we just had to do here... You owe me 3 patch reviews now :) thanks, greg k-h
