Re: [PATCH 1/3] ser_gigaset: fix up NULL checks

From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc>
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
	syzkaller@googlegroups.com, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Karsten Keil <isdn@linux-pingi.de>,
	isdn4linux@listserv.isdn4linux.de,
	gigaset307x-common@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ser_gigaset: fix up NULL checks
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 11:45:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56680665.4000301@imap.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151208221657.71fd0d71@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1041 bytes --]

Am 08.12.2015 um 23:16 schrieb One Thousand Gnomes:
> The right fix as far as I can see is to remove the tests although
> WARN_ON() combined with your tty->ops change might be safer.

Feel free to submit a patch.

>> It's pretty obvious that this should have been part of commit
>>  f34d7a5b7010 ("tty: The big operations rework"). That being said, these
> 
> It ahould probably have been fixed around the same time or in one of the
> tty locking reviews, but drivers/isdn and net/irda weren't traditionally
> part of the general tty maintenance but handled separately/

Or just ignored.

>> test puzzle me. It's not obvious why they're needed. Ie, can the null
>> dereferences they try to catch really happen? But I can try to figure
>> out that in the future, if I ever feel the urge to do so. Anyhow:
>>
>> Acked-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
> 
> Nacked-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>

So you feel it's better to maintain the current inconsistent state
created by commit f34d7a5b? Please elaborate.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]