From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 21:47:00 -0400 > Dan Williams wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 14:09 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > >> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:01:27PM -0400, Florin Malita wrote: > >>> In libertas_process_rxed_packet() and process_rxed_802_11_packet() the > >>> skb is dereferenced after being passed to netif_rx (called from > >>> libertas_upload_rx_packet). Spotted by Coverity (1658, 1659). > >> > >> Relocating the libertas_upload_rx_packet call is fine, but... > >> > >>> Also, libertas_upload_rx_packet() unconditionally returns 0 so the error > >>> check is dead code - might as well take it out. > >> Is this merely an implementation detail? Or an absolute fact? > >> If the former is true, then we should preserve the error > >> checking. If the latter, then we should change the signature of > >> libertas_upload_rx_packet to return void. > > > > According to the comments, netif_rx always succeeds. I think we should > > just change the return type to void since there's nothing else in that > > function that can fail. > > According to the implementation, netif_rx() can fail. It doesn't exactly "fail", but it does give return values which indicate RX congestion. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
