Am 31.12.21 um 09:37 schrieb 温志伟:
Then the judgment in line 944 is needed. Are the possibilities of these two positions consistent.
Why keep this judgment？
Because when mem is non-NULL bo_va->bo can't be NULL either.
Regards, Christian.
Regards,
Wen Zhiwei.
*主 题：*Re: [PATCH] gpu/drm/radeon:Fix null pointer risk *日 期：*2021-12-31 00:36 *发件人：*Christian König *收件人：*Wen Zhiweialexander.deucher@amd.comXinhui.Pan@amd.comairlied@linux.iedaniel@ffwll.ch
Am 28.12.21 um 08:31 schrieb Wen Zhiwei:
If the null pointer is not judged in advance, there is a risk that the pointer will cross the boundary
As far as I can see that case is impossible, why do you want to add a check for it?
Regards, Christian.
Signed-off-by: Wen Zhiwei
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_vm.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_vm.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_vm.c
index bb53016f3138..d3d342041adf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_vm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_vm.c @@ -951,7 +951,7 @@ int radeon_vm_bo_update(struct radeon_device *rdev,
if (mem->mem_type == TTM_PL_TT) { bo_va->flags |= RADEON_VM_PAGE_SYSTEM;
- if (!(bo_va->bo->flags & (RADEON_GEM_GTT_WC | RADEON_GEM_GTT_UC)))
- if (bo_va->bo && !(bo_va->bo->flags & (RADEON_GEM_GTT_WC |
RADEON_GEM_GTT_UC)))
bo_va->flags |= RADEON_VM_PAGE_SNOOPED;
} else {