lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] device: fix missing check on list iterator
From
On 3/26/22 23:59, Xiaomeng Tong wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 22:38:05 -0700, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>> @@ -103,11 +103,16 @@ nvkm_control_mthd_pstate_attr(struct nvkm_control *ctrl, void *data, u32 size)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> if (args->v0.state != NVIF_CONTROL_PSTATE_ATTR_V0_STATE_CURRENT) {
>>> - list_for_each_entry(pstate, &clk->states, head) {
>>> - if (i++ == args->v0.state)
>>> + list_for_each_entry(iter, &clk->states, head) {
>>> + if (i++ == args->v0.state) {
>>> + pstate = iter;
>>
>> Is iter and the assignment really necessary ? Unless I am missing something,
>> list_for_each_entry() always assigns pos (pstate/iter), even if the list is
>> empty. If nothing is found, pstate would be NULL at the end, so
>
> the pstate will not be NULL at the end! so the assignment is necessary!
> #define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member) \
> for (pos = __container_of((head)->next, pos, member); \
> &pos->member != (head); \
> pos = __container_of(pos->member.next, pos, member))
>


Uuh, yes, you are correct. Sorry for the noise.

Guenter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-27 17:09    [W:0.039 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site