Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: Add NULL checks for current->io_uring
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, asml.silence@gmail.com
Cc:     io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
References: <20230111101907.600820-1-baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
 <63d8e95e-894c-4268-648e-35e504ea80b6@kernel.dk>
From:   Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a2d622dc-a28e-acf7-2863-a2a0310c8697@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:10:31 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <63d8e95e-894c-4268-648e-35e504ea80b6@kernel.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 2023/1/11 22:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/11/23 3:19 AM, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>> As described in a previous commit 998b30c3948e, current->io_uring could
>> be NULL, and thus a NULL check is required for this variable.
>>
>> In the same way, other functions that access current->io_uring also
>> require NULL checks of this variable.
> This seems odd. Have you actually seen traces of this, or is it just
> based on "guess it can be NULL sometimes, check it in all spots"?
>

Thanks for the reply!
I checked the previous commit and inferred that there may be some problems.
I am not quite sure of this, and thus want to listen to your opinions :)


Best wishes,
Jia-Ju Bai