Re: pnp_bus_resume(): inconsequent NULL checking

[Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>]

On 20-02-08 17:59, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> I agree with you that we can just delete the dev->protocol tests
> completely. So I'd rather see something like this (built but untested):
> 
> 
> PNP: remove dev->protocol NULL checks
> 
> Every PNP device should have a valid protocol pointer.  If it doesn't,
> something's wrong and we should oops so we can find and fix the problem.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>

Ack from a functional standpoint: we are oopsing in pnp_start/stop_dev 
_anyway_ if the protocol pointer isn't set.

Will you coach this upstream? A 2.6.25-rc1 change from me made the coverity 
checker pick up on it which might be considered enough of an excuse to call 
it a regression and submit this as a fix...

> Index: work6/drivers/pnp/driver.c
> ===================================================================
> --- work6.orig/drivers/pnp/driver.c	2008-02-20 09:46:01.000000000 -0700
> +++ work6/drivers/pnp/driver.c	2008-02-20 09:46:28.000000000 -0700
> @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@
>  			return error;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (pnp_dev->protocol && pnp_dev->protocol->suspend)
> +	if (pnp_dev->protocol->suspend)
>  		pnp_dev->protocol->suspend(pnp_dev, state);
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@
>  	if (!pnp_drv)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (pnp_dev->protocol && pnp_dev->protocol->resume)
> +	if (pnp_dev->protocol->resume)
>  		pnp_dev->protocol->resume(pnp_dev);
>  
>  	if (pnp_can_write(pnp_dev)) {
> 

Rene.