On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 12:13:16AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 March 2005 22:14, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > The Coverity checker noted that while all other uses of param in
> > ps2_command() were guarded by a NULL check, this one wasn't.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm1-full/drivers/input/serio/libps2.c.old 2005-03-24 02:37:08.000000000 +0100
> > +++ linux-2.6.12-rc1-mm1-full/drivers/input/serio/libps2.c 2005-03-24 02:38:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -106,9 +106,10 @@ int ps2_command(struct ps2dev *ps2dev, u
> > command == PS2_CMD_RESET_BAT ? 1000 : 200))
> > goto out;
> >
> > - for (i = 0; i < send; i++)
> > - if (ps2_sendbyte(ps2dev, param[i], 200))
> > - goto out;
> > + if (param)
> > + for (i = 0; i < send; i++)
> > + if (ps2_sendbyte(ps2dev, param[i], 200))
> > + goto out;
> >
>
> I somewhat disagree on this one. If caller specified that command requires
> arguments to be sent and it does not provide them I'd rather had it OOPS on
> the spot. With receiving, however, caller does not really have control over
> number of characters coming from the device so specifying NULL allows just
> ignore whatever response there is.
Understood.
Could this be handled with a BUG_ON?
> Dmitry
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
