Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Jun 2022 09:05:17 -0500 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] staging: r8188eu: an incorrect return value made the function always return fail | From | Larry Finger <> |
| |
On 6/20/22 03:54, Kate Hsuan wrote: > Since _SUCCESS (1) and _FAIL (0) are used to indicate the status of the > functions. The previous commit 8ae7bf782eacad803f752c83a183393b0a67127b > fixed and prevented dereferencing a NULL pointer through checking the > return pointer. The NULL pointer check work properly but the return > values (-ENOMEM on fail and 0 on success). This work fixed the return > values to make sure the caller function will return the correct status. > > BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2097526 > Signed-off-by: Kate Hsuan <hpa@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c | 8 +++----- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c > index f4e9f6102539..2f8720db21d9 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c > @@ -180,10 +180,8 @@ s32 _rtw_init_xmit_priv(struct xmit_priv *pxmitpriv, struct adapter *padapter) > pxmitpriv->free_xmit_extbuf_cnt = num_xmit_extbuf; > > res = rtw_alloc_hwxmits(padapter); > - if (res) { > - res = _FAIL; > + if (res == _FAIL) > goto exit; > - } > > rtw_init_hwxmits(pxmitpriv->hwxmits, pxmitpriv->hwxmit_entry); >
This problem was fixed in mid May with commit 5b7419ae1d20 ("staging: r8188eu: fix rtw_alloc_hwxmits error detection for now"). The fix was
@@ -178,8 +178,7 @@ s32 _rtw_init_xmit_priv(struct xmit_priv *pxmitpriv, struct adapter *padapter)
pxmitpriv->free_xmit_extbuf_cnt = num_xmit_extbuf;
- res = rtw_alloc_hwxmits(padapter); - if (res) { + if (rtw_alloc_hwxmits(padapter)) { res = _FAIL; goto exit; }
The "for now" part is that Phillip plans to get rid of _FAIL and _SUCCESS, and replace the logic with a normal 1 for fail, etc.; however, this will be a major change that must be done carefully.
In any case NACK for this patch.
Larry
| |