On 12/26/23 01:18, Maxim Uvarov wrote:


On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 at 04:43, Sean Anderson <sean...@gmail.com 
<mailto:sean...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    On 12/25/23 10:39, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
     > Add additional checks for NULL pointers.
     >
     > Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org 
<mailto:maxim.uva...@linaro.org>>
     > ---
     >   drivers/net/sandbox.c | 3 +++
     >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
     >
     > diff --git a/drivers/net/sandbox.c b/drivers/net/sandbox.c
     > index 13022addb6..d91935e032 100644
     > --- a/drivers/net/sandbox.c
     > +++ b/drivers/net/sandbox.c
     > @@ -65,6 +65,9 @@ int sandbox_eth_arp_req_to_reply(struct udevice *dev, 
void *packet,
     >       struct ethernet_hdr *eth_recv;
     >       struct arp_hdr *arp_recv;
     >
     > +     if (!priv)
     > +             return -EAGAIN;
     > +

    When can priv be NULL?

    --Sean


Function
struct eth_sandbox_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev)
can return NULL. If you ask why it doesn't return NULL without lwip patches and 
can return NULL with lwip patch while there is no clear code dependency..
Then I can not say right now and need additional investigation. But anyway the 
return code of dev_dev_priv() has to be checked I think.

If you set priv_auto to a nonzero value, dev_get_priv will always return 
non-null
and does not need to be checked. So this is a NACK from me until you can 
justify this.

--Sean

Reply via email to