Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* Coverity: m_can_receive_skb(): Error handling issues
@ 2021-03-31 22:00 coverity-bot
  2021-04-01  8:49 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: coverity-bot @ 2021-03-31 22:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Torin Cooper-Bennun; +Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde, Gustavo A. R. Silva, linux-next

Hello!

This is an experimental semi-automated report about issues detected by
Coverity from a scan of next-20210331 as part of the linux-next scan project:
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan

You're getting this email because you were associated with the identified
lines of code (noted below) that were touched by commits:

  None
    1be37d3b0414 ("can: m_can: fix periph RX path: use rx-offload to ensure skbs are sent from softirq context")

Coverity reported the following:

*** CID 1503583:  Error handling issues  (CHECKED_RETURN)
/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c: 470 in m_can_receive_skb()
464     */
465     static void m_can_receive_skb(struct m_can_classdev *cdev,
466     			      struct sk_buff *skb,
467     			      u32 timestamp)
468     {
469     	if (cdev->is_peripheral)
vvv     CID 1503583:  Error handling issues  (CHECKED_RETURN)
vvv     Calling "can_rx_offload_queue_sorted" without checking return value (as is done elsewhere 7 out of 8 times).
470     		can_rx_offload_queue_sorted(&cdev->offload, skb, timestamp);
471     	else
472     		netif_receive_skb(skb);
473     }
474
475     static void m_can_read_fifo(struct net_device *dev, u32 rxfs)

If this is a false positive, please let us know so we can mark it as
such, or teach the Coverity rules to be smarter. If not, please make
sure fixes get into linux-next. :) For patches fixing this, please
include these lines (but double-check the "Fixes" first):

Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot@chromium.org>
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1503583 ("Error handling issues")
Fixes: 1be37d3b0414 ("can: m_can: fix periph RX path: use rx-offload to ensure skbs are sent from softirq context")

Thanks for your attention!

-- 
Coverity-bot

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: Coverity: m_can_receive_skb(): Error handling issues
  2021-03-31 22:00 Coverity: m_can_receive_skb(): Error handling issues coverity-bot
@ 2021-04-01  8:49 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Marc Kleine-Budde @ 2021-04-01  8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: coverity-bot; +Cc: Torin Cooper-Bennun, Gustavo A. R. Silva, linux-next


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2010 bytes --]

On 31.03.2021 15:00:00, coverity-bot wrote:
> This is an experimental semi-automated report about issues detected by
> Coverity from a scan of next-20210331 as part of the linux-next scan project:
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan
> 
> You're getting this email because you were associated with the identified
> lines of code (noted below) that were touched by commits:
> 
>   None
>     1be37d3b0414 ("can: m_can: fix periph RX path: use rx-offload to ensure skbs are sent from softirq context")
> 
> Coverity reported the following:
> 
> *** CID 1503583:  Error handling issues  (CHECKED_RETURN)
> /drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c: 470 in m_can_receive_skb()
> 464     */
> 465     static void m_can_receive_skb(struct m_can_classdev *cdev,
> 466     			      struct sk_buff *skb,
> 467     			      u32 timestamp)
> 468     {
> 469     	if (cdev->is_peripheral)
> vvv     CID 1503583:  Error handling issues  (CHECKED_RETURN)
> vvv     Calling "can_rx_offload_queue_sorted" without checking return value (as is done elsewhere 7 out of 8 times).
> 470     		can_rx_offload_queue_sorted(&cdev->offload, skb, timestamp);
> 471     	else
> 472     		netif_receive_skb(skb);
> 473     }
> 474
> 475     static void m_can_read_fifo(struct net_device *dev, u32 rxfs)
> 
> If this is a false positive, please let us know so we can mark it as
> such, or teach the Coverity rules to be smarter. If not, please make
> sure fixes get into linux-next. :) For patches fixing this, please
> include these lines (but double-check the "Fixes" first):

Excellent bug report! I've send a patch:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20210401084515.1455013-1-mkl@pengutronix.de/

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-03-31 22:00 Coverity: m_can_receive_skb(): Error handling issues coverity-bot
2021-04-01  8:49 ` Marc Kleine-Budde

Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/0 linux-next/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-next linux-next/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next \
		linux-next@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-next

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-next


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git