| Message ID | 3292373.oxnXTOSWCQ@wuerfel (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Johannes Berg |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 21:39 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 4:06:17 PM CET Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > Applied. Also fixed the typo in the subject :) > > Thanks! Unfortunately I now got another warning for the same > function, and though I would have expected the patch to fix it, that > did not work: I've come to expect better of you (i.e. testing your own patches) ;-) Come to think of it, I'm thinking I should drop this patch and the driver should just use iwe_stream_add_event() instead? It'll be somewhat tricky to get the length correct though. Alternatively, perhaps we should just uninline all the crap and then the compiler can't bother us :) johannes
> Come to think of it, I'm thinking I should drop this patch and the > driver should just use iwe_stream_add_event() instead? It'll be > somewhat tricky to get the length correct though. No, turns out that's basically impossible with all the compat etc. stuff here. johannes
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 21:39 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 4:06:17 PM CET Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > Applied. Also fixed the typo in the subject :) > > Thanks! Unfortunately I now got another warning for the same > function, and though I would have expected the patch to fix it, that > did not work: > > In file included from /git/arm- > soc/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/prism54/islpci_dev.h:27:0, > from /git/arm- > soc/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/prism54/isl_ioctl.h:24, > from /git/arm- > soc/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/prism54/isl_ioctl.c:32: > /git/arm-soc/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/prism54/isl_ioctl.c: In > function 'prism54_get_scan': > /git/arm-soc/include/net/iw_handler.h:560:4: error: argument 2 null > where non-null expected [-Werror=nonnull] > memcpy(stream + point_len, extra, iwe->u.data.length); And I realized only now that this was a different place ... I've just added the check you suggested - spent way too much time already on this old crap :) johannes
On Thursday, January 12, 2017 10:16:00 AM CET Johannes Berg wrote: > And I realized only now that this was a different place ... Right, it was a few hundred randconfigs later after I had confirmed that the first patch fixed all the configurations that were broken at first. > I've just added the check you suggested - spent way too much time > already on this old crap Ok, thanks! Let's hope it doesn't come back once more. I'm still trying to categorize the newly added warnings in gcc-7, there a number of very useful warnings that got added, but some of them are rather noisy and find both a number of real bugs and false positives. The NULL check had only a few findings that all seemed worth fixing. Arnd
diff --git a/include/net/iw_handler.h b/include/net/iw_handler.h index 1a41043688bc..c2aa73e5e6bb 100644 --- a/include/net/iw_handler.h +++ b/include/net/iw_handler.h @@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ iwe_stream_add_point(struct iw_request_info *info, char *stream, char *ends, memcpy(stream + lcp_len, ((char *) &iwe->u) + IW_EV_POINT_OFF, IW_EV_POINT_PK_LEN - IW_EV_LCP_PK_LEN); - if (iwe->u.data.length) + if (iwe->u.data.length && extra) memcpy(stream + point_len, extra, iwe->u.data.length); stream += event_len; }