linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/13] genirq/msi: Add cpumask allocation to alloc_msi

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:06:52 +0200
From:   Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     axboe@...com, tglx@...utronix.de, keith.busch@...el.com,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] genirq/msi: Add cpumask allocation to
 alloc_msi_entry

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 03:50:07PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 09:30:58AM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&desc->list);
> > >  	desc->dev = dev;
> > > +	desc->nvec_used = nvec;

(*)

> > > +	if (affinity) {
> > > +		desc->affinity = kmemdup(affinity,
> > > +			nvec * sizeof(*desc->affinity), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > +		if (!desc->affinity) {
> > > +			kfree(desc);
> > > +			return NULL;
> > > +		}
> > > +	}
> > 
> > nit - should not "desc" initialization follow "desc->affinity" allocation?
> 
> I can't parse that sentence.  Do you mean the desc->nvec_used setup?

Yes, the inits above (*) would be useless if desc->affinity allocation failed.