There is otherwise a risk of a possible null pointer dereference.
Was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 49d7fab..d85a225 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -1674,11 +1674,12 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char *device_path)
struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices;
fs_devices = root->fs_info->fs_devices;
while (fs_devices) {
- if (fs_devices->seed == cur_devices)
+ if (fs_devices->seed == cur_devices) {
+ fs_devices->seed = cur_devices->seed;
break;
+ }
fs_devices = fs_devices->seed;
}
- fs_devices->seed = cur_devices->seed;
cur_devices->seed = NULL;
lock_chunks(root);
__btrfs_close_devices(cur_devices);
--
1.7.10.4
--
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
