[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F61B141.9000106@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:37:13 +0530
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
CC: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, deepthi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
venki@...gle.com, trenn@...e.de, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c: add missing kfree
On 03/15/2012 02:02 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
>
> The function acpi_processor_add is stored in the ops.add field of a
> acpi_driver structure. This function is then called in
> acpi_bus_driver_init. On failure, this function clears the field
> device->driver_data, but does not free its contents. Thus the free has to
> be done by the add function. In acpi_processor_add, the corresponding
> value is pr. This value is currently freed on failure before storing it in
> device->driver_data, but not after. This free is added in the error
> handling code at the end of the function. The per_cpu variable
> processors is also cleared so that it does not refer to a dangling pointer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
>
See a minor nitpick below.. Other than that, everything looks great!
Reviewed-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 13 +++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> index 2801b41..98c3648 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> @@ -536,8 +536,8 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&pr->throttling.shared_cpu_map, GFP_KERNEL)) {
> - kfree(pr);
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + result = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_free_pr;
> }
>
> pr->handle = device->handle;
> @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);
> if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) {
> result = -EFAULT;
> - goto err_free_cpumask;
> + goto err_clear_processor;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -595,9 +595,14 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>
> err_remove_sysfs:
> sysfs_remove_link(&device->dev.kobj, "sysdev");
> +err_clear_processor:
> + /* processor_device_array is not cleared to allow checks for buggy
> + BIOSes */
Multi-line comments in the kernel are generally written like:
/*
* blah blah blah
* blah blah ....
*/
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> err_free_cpumask:
> free_cpumask_var(pr->throttling.shared_cpu_map);
> -
> +err_free_pr:
> + kfree(pr);
> return result;
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists