On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 10:18 +0100, ext Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 11:53:57AM +0300, sudarshan.bisht@nokia.com wrote:
This patch has fix for situations where variable can be NULL but not been checked beforehand.
This description doesn't seem to match the patch...
- if (h == NULL)
- if (h) snd_dlclose(h);
This is a coding style change, the two conditions are equivalent.
SNDERR("Invalid type for func %s definition", str);
err = -EINVAL; goto _err;This appears to be fixing an uninitialised return value error.
return err; if (periods == 1) return -EINVAL;
if (*period_time == 0) {
if (period_time) { err = INTERNAL(snd_pcm_hw_params_get_period_time)(hw_params, period_time, NULL); if (err < 0)This check alters the semantics - rather than checking if *period_time is non-zero we now check to see if period_time is non-NULL, paying no attention to the value if the pointer is set.
If "period_time == NULL" ( in preceding if condition) is true then "if (*period_time == 0)" has no meaning ( causes segmentation fault ) and if "*period_time == 0" ( in preceding if condition) is true then obviously period_time will be a valid pointer and satisfy the condition. Thats what original source codes demands.
There was at least one relevant fix in there but lots of the changes are as above. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel