On Fri, 10 Mar 2023, Dan Carpenter <erro...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 04:51:10PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Thu, 09 Mar 2023, Dan Carpenter <erro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hello Jani Nikula, >> > >> > This is a semi-automatic email about new static checker warnings. >> > >> > The patch 1b28c1c789d0: "drm/i915/dmc: add i915_to_dmc() and >> > dmc->i915 and use them" from Mar 1, 2023, leads to the following >> > Smatch complaint: >> > >> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c:1162 >> > intel_dmc_debugfs_status_show() >> > error: we previously assumed 'dmc' could be null (see line 1148) >> > >> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c >> > 1142 >> > 1143 wakeref = intel_runtime_pm_get(&i915->runtime_pm); >> > 1144 >> > 1145 seq_printf(m, "DMC initialized: %s\n", str_yes_no(dmc));' >> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> > This is a check for NULL too. >> > >> > 1146 seq_printf(m, "fw loaded: %s\n", >> > 1147 str_yes_no(intel_dmc_has_payload(i915))); >> > 1148 seq_printf(m, "path: %s\n", dmc ? dmc->fw_path : "N/A"); >> > ^^^ >> > The patch adds a check for NULL. >> > >> > 1149 seq_printf(m, "Pipe A fw needed: %s\n", >> > 1150 str_yes_no(GRAPHICS_VER(i915) >= 12)); >> > 1151 seq_printf(m, "Pipe A fw loaded: %s\n", >> > 1152 str_yes_no(has_dmc_id_fw(i915, >> > DMC_FW_PIPEA))); >> > 1153 seq_printf(m, "Pipe B fw needed: %s\n", >> > 1154 str_yes_no(IS_ALDERLAKE_P(i915) || >> > 1155 DISPLAY_VER(i915) >= 14)); >> > 1156 seq_printf(m, "Pipe B fw loaded: %s\n", >> > 1157 str_yes_no(has_dmc_id_fw(i915, >> > DMC_FW_PIPEB))); >> > 1158 >> > 1159 if (!intel_dmc_has_payload(i915)) >> >> intel_dmc_has_payload() should always return false for dmc == NULL. > > Ah, right. Sorry for the noise. I'm going to try figure out how to > make Smatch parse this correctly.
No worries. I did wonder while writing the patch whether it would throw off people, didn't even consider static analysis. :) BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
