On May 20, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote: >>> mad_agent_priv->agent.mr = ib_get_dma_mr(port_priv->qp_info[qpn].qp- >>> pd, >>> IB_ACCESS_LOCAL_WRITE); >>> >>> in which case it may be safer to check for the NULL pointer. Can you >> confirm if this was the spot? >> >> Yes it was that spot. I did think of that today after I sent the patch. >> >> Do you think it would be safer just to check for both pointers QP0 and 1 >> (depending on the registration)? > > Yes, it seems safer and easier to maintain if we just validated the pointer.
I will rework the patch. Thanks, Ira > > - Sean -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
