Hello Yue Haibing,

Commit c824125cbb18 ("ixgbe: Fix passing 0 to ERR_PTR in
ixgbe_run_xdp()") from Jan 6, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the
following Smatch static checker warning:

        drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c:2108 ixgbe_put_rx_buffer()
        warn: possible NULL dereference of 'skb'

drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
    2099 static void ixgbe_put_rx_buffer(struct ixgbe_ring *rx_ring,
    2100                                 struct ixgbe_rx_buffer *rx_buffer,
    2101                                 struct sk_buff *skb,
    2102                                 int rx_buffer_pgcnt)
    2103 {
    2104         if (ixgbe_can_reuse_rx_page(rx_buffer, rx_buffer_pgcnt)) {
    2105                 /* hand second half of page back to the ring */
    2106                 ixgbe_reuse_rx_page(rx_ring, rx_buffer);
    2107         } else {
--> 2108                 if (!IS_ERR(skb) && IXGBE_CB(skb)->dma == 
rx_buffer->dma) {
                                     ^^^
This can't be an error pointer and probably it should be a NULL check.
I'm not sure if your patch introduced this issue or just exposed it.

    2109                         /* the page has been released from the ring */
    2110                         IXGBE_CB(skb)->page_released = true;
    2111                 } else {
    2112                         /* we are not reusing the buffer so unmap it */
    2113                         dma_unmap_page_attrs(rx_ring->dev, 
rx_buffer->dma,
    2114                                              ixgbe_rx_pg_size(rx_ring),
    2115                                              DMA_FROM_DEVICE,
    2116                                              IXGBE_RX_DMA_ATTR);
    2117                 }
    2118                 __page_frag_cache_drain(rx_buffer->page,
    2119                                         rx_buffer->pagecnt_bias);
    2120         }
    2121 
    2122         /* clear contents of rx_buffer */
    2123         rx_buffer->page = NULL;
    2124         rx_buffer->skb = NULL;
    2125 }

regards,
dan carpenter

Reply via email to