On 2012年12月08日 18:10, Li Zefan wrote: > 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? At least for code clean now. In __btrfs_panic, we have: 276 if (fs_info) 277 s_id = fs_info->sb->s_id; So for the ->mount_opt field access, we'd better do the check first. >> 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
