Le 09/05/15 12:47, Andrew Lunn a écrit : > On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 02:44:01PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 09:18:40PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: >>> On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 01:01:29PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: >>>> The function phy_connect_direct can possibly return a positive >>>> return code. Using ERR_PTR with a positive value can lead to >>>> deferencing of an invalid pointer. >>> >>> Is this the correct fix? Would it not be better to find where the >>> positive return code is from and fix that? >> >> I guess I can trace it back to find out where the positive return code >> is originating. >> >> Is phy_connect_direct always supposed to return valid -errno? > > I would look at this from a different angle. A positive ERRNO is > probably a bug of some sort. So rather than papering over the cracks, > go find what the real issue is.
Agreed, you could place a WARN_ON(rc > 0) and get the offending call trace leading to that problem. I suspect that one of the PHY drivers might be returning a positive value as part of a phy_read() call and that does not get properly filtered out. > > It might not be an ERRNO. E.g. https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/3/534 > fixed a bug where a positive value is returned which is not an > indication of an error. > > Andrew > -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
