Hi Dan,

thanks for your comments and yes, this looks wrong. In Patch 5 of this series, 
the whole crap is therefore being removed.

Marc

> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 08:23:07PM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> > @@ -139,7 +159,7 @@ static void nvec_dispatch(struct work_struct *work)
> > 
> >             } else {
> >             
> >                     parse_msg(nvec, msg);
> 
> This isn't a comment on this patch, but just something I noticed in
> passing.  parse_msg() dereferences msg so check on the next line is
> too late.
> 
> >                     if((!msg) || (!msg->data))
> 
>                            ^^^^^^
> Too late.
> 
> > -                           dev_warn(nvec->dev, "attempt access zero 
> > pointer");
> > +                           dev_warn(nvec->dev, "attempt access zero 
> > pointer\n");
> > 
> >                     else {
> >                     
> >                             kfree(msg->data);
> 
>                                       ^^^^^^^^^
> Another inconsistence dereference here (would oops if msg were NULL).
> 
> >                             kfree(msg);
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to