ChangeSet 1.1372.2.5, 2003/07/09 20:51:38-07:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PATCH] USB: Small correction to usb-skeleton.c
This fixes a minor error in usb-skeleton's disconnect() routine: if the
interface's private data is NULL, the current code exits without releasing
the disconnect_sem semaphore.
I removed the test entirely because I can't think of any situation where
that private data actually would be NULL, other than a pretty badly
malfunctioning system. Why test for something that should never happen?
And if it does happen, we shouldn't want the disconnect routine to fail
silently -- we should want to see a nice big segfault (when the NULL
pointer is dereferenced) so that we can find and fix the underlying error.
Is there any sort of convention (a la Documentation/CodingStyle) about
whether this approach should be used in general? There are _lots_ of
places in the kernel where unnecessary checks for NULL pointers are made.
drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c | 3 ---
1 files changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff -Nru a/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c b/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c
--- a/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c Thu Jul 10 16:01:34 2003
+++ b/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c Thu Jul 10 16:01:34 2003
@@ -646,9 +646,6 @@
dev = usb_get_intfdata (interface);
usb_set_intfdata (interface, NULL);
- if (!dev)
- return;
-
down (&dev->sem);
/* disable open() */
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft
Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more.
Download & eval WebKing and get a free book.
www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps1
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
