linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: pinctrl-mxs: fix implicit declaration of free()

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHdPZaNBPLZgpSXzgNXt+D6cJdaD_1vo0Wbyah4UKNj6UfKHXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:57:55 +0530
From:	"devendra.aaru" <devendra.aaru@...il.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Otavio Salvador <otavio@...ystems.com.br>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
	fabio.estevam@...escale.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: pinctrl-mxs: fix implicit declaration of free()

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Linus Walleij
<linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> But:
>
>>  free_group:
>> -       if (!purecfg)
>> -               free(group);
>> +       kfree(group);
>
> Why did you delete the if (!purecfg) clause?
>
One way we can say that as kfreeing of null doesn't affect (panic)
anything and using it
without purecfg may be ok.

but as the code flow says that the group is allocated only when the
purecfg is not true, so i think
its better to follow that way.

> Yours,
> Linus Walleij

Thanks,
Devendra.
--
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/