From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [net/9p] Add a Warning to catch NULL fids passed to p9_client_clunk(). Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:50:26 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1282753626-28268-1-git-send-email-jvrao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "Venkateswararao Jujjuri \(JV\)" To: "Venkateswararao Jujjuri \(JV\)" , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from e28smtp07.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.7]:57211 "EHLO e28smtp07.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752369Ab0HZGUd (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:20:33 -0400 Received: from d28relay03.in.ibm.com (d28relay03.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.60]) by e28smtp07.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o7Q6KR6o019633 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:50:27 +0530 Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (d28av05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.67]) by d28relay03.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o7Q6KRtd4395242 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:50:27 +0530 Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av05.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o7Q6KR40002758 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:20:27 +1000 In-Reply-To: <1282753626-28268-1-git-send-email-jvrao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:27:06 -0700, "Venkateswararao Jujjuri (JV)" wrote: > Signed-off-by: Venkateswararao Jujjuri > --- > net/9p/client.c | 6 ++++++ > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/9p/client.c b/net/9p/client.c > index dc6f2f2..aa7be29 100644 > --- a/net/9p/client.c > +++ b/net/9p/client.c > @@ -1201,6 +1201,12 @@ int p9_client_clunk(struct p9_fid *fid) > struct p9_client *clnt; > struct p9_req_t *req; > > + if (!fid) { > + P9_EPRINTK(KERN_WARNING, "Trying to clunk with NULL fid\n"); > + dump_stack(); > + return 0; > + } > + > P9_DPRINTK(P9_DEBUG_9P, ">>> TCLUNK fid %d\n", fid->fid); > err = 0; > clnt = fid->clnt; But why ? We should not have called clunk on null fid. Do you see any area of code that can do this ? Or is it a debug patch that you did when developing other features. In case of later do we need to merge this upstream ? -aneesh