Re: drivers/net/chelsio/my3126.c: inconsequent NULL checking

["Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>]

On 07/12/06, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> The Coverity checker spotted the following inconsequent NULL checking
> introduced by commit f1d3d38af75789f1b82969b83b69cab540609789:
>
> <--  snip  -->
>
> ...
> static struct cphy *my3126_phy_create(adapter_t *adapter,
>                         int phy_addr, struct mdio_ops *mdio_ops)
> {
>         struct cphy *cphy = kzalloc(sizeof (*cphy), GFP_KERNEL);
>
>         if (cphy)
>                 cphy_init(cphy, adapter, phy_addr, &my3126_ops, mdio_ops);
>
>         INIT_WORK(&cphy->phy_update, my3216_poll, cphy);
>         cphy->bmsr = 0;
>
>         return (cphy);
> }
> ...
>
> <--  snip  -->
>
> It doesn't make sense to first check whether "cphy" is NULL and
> dereference it unconditionally later.

How about simply changing
        if (cphy)
                cphy_init(cphy, adapter, phy_addr, &my3126_ops, mdio_ops);
into
        if (!cphy)
                return NULL;

callers need to be able to handle that ofcourse, but I haven't checked that yet.

--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/