Is it safe to assume that response processor(s) can handle NULL gchar*? I
guess we need to check that in response processors as well.


On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:58 PM, Aleksander Morgado
<[email protected]>wrote:

>
> > When the serial port is not open, internal_queue_command
> > (mm-serial-port.c) invokes serial_probe_at_parse_response
> > (mm-port-probe.c) with a NULL response. This patch modifies
> > serial_probe_at_parse_response to handle that properly.
> > ---
> >  src/mm-port-probe.c |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/mm-port-probe.c b/src/mm-port-probe.c
> > index baadee0..c31affe 100644
> > --- a/src/mm-port-probe.c
> > +++ b/src/mm-port-probe.c
> > @@ -450,7 +450,7 @@ serial_probe_at_parse_response (MMAtSerialPort *port,
> >      }
> >
> >      if (!task->at_commands->response_processor
> (task->at_commands->command,
> > -                                                response->str,
> > +                                                (response) ?
> response->str : "",
> >
>  !!task->at_commands[1].command,
> >                                                  error,
> >                                                  &result,
>
> When we get the NULL response, we should also get a proper 'error' set
> as well. If so, the fix should be this one instead:
>     response ? response->str : NULL
> so that we pass NULL to the response processor instead of the empty string.
>
> --
> Aleksander
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
networkmanager-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

Reply via email to