lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: RDMA: Clean destroy CQ in drivers do not return errors
From
Date
On Fri, 2019-06-14 at 14:59 +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Static analysis with Coverity reported an issue with the following
> commit:
>
> commit a52c8e2469c30cf7ac453d624aed9c168b23d1af
> Author: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> Date: Tue May 28 14:37:28 2019 +0300
>
> RDMA: Clean destroy CQ in drivers do not return errors
>
> In function bnxt_re_destroy_cq() contains the following:
>
> if (!cq->umem)
> ib_umem_release(cq->umem);

Given that the original test that was replaced was:
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cq->umem))

we aren't really worried about a null cq, just that umem is valid. So,
the logic is inverted on the test (or possibly we shouldn't have
replaced !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cq->umem) at all).

But on closer inspection, the bnxt_re specific portion of this patch
appears to have another problem in that it no longer checks the result
of bnxt_qplib_destroy_cq() yet it does nothing to keep that function
from failing.

Leon, can you send a followup fix?

> Coverity detects this as a deference after null check on the null
> pointer cq->umem:
>
> "var_deref_model: Passing null pointer cq->umem to ib_umem_release,
> which dereferences it"
>
> Is the logic inverted on that null check?
>
> Colin

--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57
2FDD
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-14 21:47    [W:0.207 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site