Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764835AbYBUPbv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:31:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754520AbYBUPb0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:31:26 -0500 Received: from g1t0026.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.33]:4424 "EHLO g1t0026.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754027AbYBUPbZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:31:25 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Rene Herman Subject: Re: pnp_bus_resume(): inconsequent NULL checking Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:26:53 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: Adrian Bunk , ambx1@neo.rr.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20080219224908.GM31955@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <200802200959.21814.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> <47BD1069.1060109@keyaccess.nl> In-Reply-To: <47BD1069.1060109@keyaccess.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200802210826.53731.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1982 Lines: 55 On Wednesday 20 February 2008 10:47:21 pm Rene Herman wrote: > 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 > > 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... I'll push it upstream, but a coverity warning seems like a marginal excuse for putting it in 2.6.25. Is there any real reason it can't wait until 2.6.26? > > 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. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/