Re: drm/i915: Copy the staged connector config to the legacy atomic state

[David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>]

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 05:36:40PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hello Ander Conselvan de Oliveira,
> 
> This is a semi-automatic email about new static checker warnings.
> 
> The patch 944b0c765757: "drm/i915: Copy the staged connector config 
> to the legacy atomic state" from Mar 20, 2015, leads to the following 
> Smatch complaint:
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:9118 intel_release_load_detect_pipe()
> 	 error: we previously assumed 'state' could be null (see line 9082)
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>   9081			state = drm_atomic_state_alloc(dev);
>   9082			if (!state)
>   9083				goto fail;
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^
> Patch changes a return into a goto.
> 
>   9084	
>   9085			state->acquire_ctx = ctx;
>   9086	
>   9087			connector_state = drm_atomic_get_connector_state(state, connector);
>   9088			if (IS_ERR(connector_state))
>   9089				goto fail;
>   9090	
>   9091			to_intel_connector(connector)->new_encoder = NULL;
>   9092			intel_encoder->new_crtc = NULL;
>   9093			intel_crtc->new_enabled = false;
>   9094			intel_crtc->new_config = NULL;
>   9095	
>   9096			connector_state->best_encoder = NULL;
>   9097			connector_state->crtc = NULL;
>   9098	
>   9099			intel_set_mode(crtc, NULL, 0, 0, NULL, state);
>   9100	
>   9101			drm_atomic_state_free(state);
>   9102	
>   9103			if (old->release_fb) {
>   9104				drm_framebuffer_unregister_private(old->release_fb);
>   9105				drm_framebuffer_unreference(old->release_fb);
>   9106			}
>   9107	
>   9108			return;
>   9109		}
>   9110	
>   9111		/* Switch crtc and encoder back off if necessary */
>   9112		if (old->dpms_mode != DRM_MODE_DPMS_ON)
>   9113			connector->funcs->dpms(connector, old->dpms_mode);
>   9114	
>   9115		return;
>   9116	fail:
>   9117		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Couldn't release load detect pipe.\n");
>   9118		drm_atomic_state_free(state);
>                                       ^^^^^
> Dereferenced inside function call.
> 
>   9119	}
>   9120	

Wouldn't it make more sense to make drm_atomic_state_free() follow
the same semantics as *free() functions typically do
(no operation performed)?


Kind regards, David Weinehall
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx