On 2012/12/7 23:42, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote: > We should make sure fs_info is not null before we refer to its field. > Add simple check here. Why? Is there any caller passing NULL @fs_info to this function? > > Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/btrfs/super.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c > index 915ac14..c6a3633 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c > @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ void __btrfs_panic(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *function, > vaf.va = &args; > > errstr = btrfs_decode_error(fs_info, errno, nbuf); > - if (fs_info->mount_opt & BTRFS_MOUNT_PANIC_ON_FATAL_ERROR) > + if (fs_info && (fs_info->mount_opt & BTRFS_MOUNT_PANIC_ON_FATAL_ERROR)) > panic(KERN_CRIT "BTRFS panic (device %s) in %s:%d: %pV (%s)\n", > s_id, function, line, &vaf, errstr); > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
