Julia Lawall
2017-Nov-28 12:56 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings (fwd)
This is a false positive, but I wonder if it is really necessary to put
the assignment in the conditional test expression.
julia
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:23:36 +0800
From: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu at intel.com>
To: kbuild at 01.org
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall at lip6.fr>
Subject: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings
CC: kbuild-all at 01.org
CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
TO: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>
CC: David Airlie <airlied at linux.ie>
CC: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
CC: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org
CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent IS_ERR and
PTR_ERR on line 110.
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent IS_ERR and
PTR_ERR on line 111.
PTR_ERR should access the value just tested by IS_ERR
Semantic patch information:
There can be false positives in the patch case, where it is the call to
IS_ERR that is wrong.
Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/tests/odd_ptr_err.cocci
Fixes: 920d2b5ef215 ("drm/nouveau/mmu: define user interfaces to mmu vmm
opertaions")
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu at intel.com>
---
Please take the patch only if it's a positive warning. Thanks!
uvmm.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c
@@ -107,8 +107,9 @@ nvkm_uvmm_mthd_map(struct nvkm_uvmm *uvm
return ret;
if (IS_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle)))) {
- VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle, PTR_ERR(memory));
- return PTR_ERR(memory);
+ VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle,
+ PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle))));
+ return PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle)));
}
mutex_lock(&vmm->mutex);
Karol Herbst
2017-Nov-28 14:50 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings (fwd)
Hi julia,
I think it would be better to extract the assignment out of the if
clause. Then you'll get something like this:
memory = ...;
if (IS_ERR(memory)) {
....
}
so, to answer your question: no, it isn't necessary.
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall at lip6.fr>
wrote:> This is a false positive, but I wonder if it is really necessary to put
> the assignment in the conditional test expression.
>
> julia
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:23:36 +0800
> From: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu at intel.com>
> To: kbuild at 01.org
> Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall at lip6.fr>
> Subject: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings
>
> CC: kbuild-all at 01.org
> CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> TO: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com>
> CC: David Airlie <airlied at linux.ie>
> CC: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> CC: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org
> CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent
IS_ERR and PTR_ERR on line 110.
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent
IS_ERR and PTR_ERR on line 111.
>
> PTR_ERR should access the value just tested by IS_ERR
>
> Semantic patch information:
> There can be false positives in the patch case, where it is the call to
> IS_ERR that is wrong.
>
> Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/tests/odd_ptr_err.cocci
>
> Fixes: 920d2b5ef215 ("drm/nouveau/mmu: define user interfaces to mmu
vmm opertaions")
> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu at intel.com>
> ---
>
> Please take the patch only if it's a positive warning. Thanks!
>
> uvmm.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c
> @@ -107,8 +107,9 @@ nvkm_uvmm_mthd_map(struct nvkm_uvmm *uvm
> return ret;
>
> if (IS_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle)))) {
> - VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle,
PTR_ERR(memory));
> - return PTR_ERR(memory);
> + VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle,
> + PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client,
handle))));
> + return PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client,
handle)));
> }
>
> mutex_lock(&vmm->mutex);
> _______________________________________________
> Nouveau mailing list
> Nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
Julia Lawall
2017-Nov-28 14:52 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings (fwd)
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Karol Herbst wrote:> Hi julia, > > I think it would be better to extract the assignment out of the if > clause. Then you'll get something like this: > > memory = ...; > if (IS_ERR(memory)) { > .... > } > > so, to answer your question: no, it isn't necessary.Will someone take care of it? I'm just the 0-day proxy :) julia> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall at lip6.fr> wrote: > > This is a false positive, but I wonder if it is really necessary to put > > the assignment in the conditional test expression. > > > > julia > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:23:36 +0800 > > From: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu at intel.com> > > To: kbuild at 01.org > > Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall at lip6.fr> > > Subject: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/mmu: fix odd_ptr_err.cocci warnings > > > > CC: kbuild-all at 01.org > > CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org > > TO: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com> > > CC: David Airlie <airlied at linux.ie> > > CC: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org > > CC: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org > > CC: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR_ERR on line 110. > > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c:109:5-11: inconsistent IS_ERR and PTR_ERR on line 111. > > > > PTR_ERR should access the value just tested by IS_ERR > > > > Semantic patch information: > > There can be false positives in the patch case, where it is the call to > > IS_ERR that is wrong. > > > > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/tests/odd_ptr_err.cocci > > > > Fixes: 920d2b5ef215 ("drm/nouveau/mmu: define user interfaces to mmu vmm opertaions") > > Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu at intel.com> > > --- > > > > Please take the patch only if it's a positive warning. Thanks! > > > > uvmm.c | 5 +++-- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/uvmm.c > > @@ -107,8 +107,9 @@ nvkm_uvmm_mthd_map(struct nvkm_uvmm *uvm > > return ret; > > > > if (IS_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle)))) { > > - VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle, PTR_ERR(memory)); > > - return PTR_ERR(memory); > > + VMM_DEBUG(vmm, "memory %016llx %ld\n", handle, > > + PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle)))); > > + return PTR_ERR((memory = nvkm_umem_search(client, handle))); > > } > > > > mutex_lock(&vmm->mutex); > > _______________________________________________ > > Nouveau mailing list > > Nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau >