[PATCH] ath10k: fix potential null dereference bugs

[Bob Copeland]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:51:24PM +0000, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > It's not clear that's the same situation, since tun->sk is very likely
> > to have been an actual pointer, not an embedded thing like drv_priv.

Just to follow up on that thread, I did research it a bit yesterday and
came to the conclusion that it is UB even when the target is in the same
struct.  However, in a not very scientific survey, I didn't see either clang
or gcc remove the test in a simplified test case (with -O3 and without
-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks).  If drv_priv were an actual pointer, gcc
did remove it but clang did not.  So, there's that.

> > However, with all this, I think I'd simply not take any chances - the
> > patch isn't exactly invasive and in some cases (for example the first
> > hunk of the patch) will even improve the code to the point where the
> > compiler could warn about uninitialized usage of the pointer when the
> > code gets modified to use it in case of !txq->sta.
> >
> > I'd take it, but I guess it's Kalle's decision :)
> 
> Yeah, I'm leaning towards Johannes. These are not really invasive.

Thanks, and sorry about the checkpatch -- I did run checkpatch on it but
for some reason my version only complained about some of them.

-- 
Bob Copeland %% http://bobcopeland.com/