On 8/6/19 10:31 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
On 2019-08-06 02:55, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
@@ -1493,6 +1493,11 @@ static int _sdw_prepare_stream(struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream) } } + if (!bus) { + pr_err("Configuration error in %s\n", __func__); + return -EINVAL; + }
This should probably be located in separate path - not at all an initialization removal.
It's a consequence of the initialization removal: because we are removing the default init, there is a risk that the loop just before do not set it, so it's required to trap the case where the variable in not initialized.
@@ -1573,6 +1578,11 @@ static int _sdw_enable_stream(struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream) } } + if (!bus) { + pr_err("Configuration error in %s\n", __func__); + return -EINVAL; + }
Same here.
same reply
@@ -1639,13 +1650,14 @@ static int _sdw_disable_stream(struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream) ret = do_bank_switch(stream); if (ret < 0) { - dev_err(bus->dev, "Bank switch failed: %d\n", ret); + pr_err("Bank switch failed: %d\n", ret); return ret; }
Here too.
no, same thing, the bus variable is initialized in loops so tools will report a possible path where bus->dev is an invalid dereference.
I might have missed something though I bet you got my point.