Re: [patch -next v2] mv643xx_eth: potential null dereference

[walter harms <wharms@bfs.de>]

Dan Carpenter schrieb:
> We assume that "pd" can be null on the previous line, and throughout the
> function so we should check it here as well.  This was introduced by
> 9b2c2ff7a1c0 "mv643xx_eth: use sw csum for big packets"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
> ---
> v2: style change
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/mv643xx_eth.c b/drivers/net/mv643xx_eth.c
> index 73bb8ea..f5e72fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/mv643xx_eth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/mv643xx_eth.c
> @@ -2670,7 +2670,8 @@ static int mv643xx_eth_shared_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	 * Detect hardware parameters.
>  	 */
>  	msp->t_clk = (pd != NULL && pd->t_clk != 0) ? pd->t_clk : 133000000;
> -	msp->tx_csum_limit = pd->tx_csum_limit ? pd->tx_csum_limit : 9 * 1024;
> +	msp->tx_csum_limit = (pd != NULL && pd->tx_csum_limit) ?
> +					pd->tx_csum_limit : 9 * 1024;
>  	infer_hw_params(msp);
>  
>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, msp);

this is a bit complicated, IMHO ppl have a bigger chance to discover what is going on
with this version:

    if (!pd ) {
       msp->t_clk = 133000000;
       msp->tx_csum_limit = 9 * 1024;
     }
     else
      {
	msp->t_clk = pd->t_clk ? pd->t_clk : 133000000 ;
        msp->tx_csum_limit = pd->tx_csum_limit ? pd->tx_csum_limit : 9 * 1024;
       }


re,
 wh