On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 01:31 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> If we dereference a variable anyway in other parts of the code,
> there is no need to check against NULL in a single place.
NACK. This is not true.
If lq_sta is NULL, it means that mvm_sta is also NULL. Then we call
the rate_control_send with mvm_sta == NULL:
if (rate_control_send_low(sta, mvm_sta, txrc))
return;
The rate_control_send_low() function looks like this:
bool rate_control_send_low(struct ieee80211_sta *pubsta,
void *priv_sta,
struct ieee80211_tx_rate_control *txrc)
{
[...]
if (!pubsta || !priv_sta || rc_no_data_or_no_ack_use_min(txrc)) {
[...]
return true;
}
[...]
}
Which means that if priv_sta (aka mvm_sta) is NULL, we will return
without running the rest of rs_get_rate() where lq_sta is accessed
without checks.
I admit that the rs_get_rate() function is a bit hard to read, but
removing the lq_sta check as you did doesn't help, but makes things
worse.
--
Cheers,
Luca.��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���zW����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
