linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/2] iio: inkern: put the IIO device when mem alloc gets failed

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]

Message-ID: <A874F61F95741C4A9BA573A70FE3998F41EF5120@DQHE02.ent.ti.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Sep 2012 09:57:52 +0000
From:	"Kim, Milo" <Milo.Kim@...com>
To:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
CC:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>,
	"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] iio: inkern: put the IIO device when mem alloc gets
 failed

> >  drivers/iio/inkern.c |    5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/inkern.c b/drivers/iio/inkern.c
> > index 13748c0..aff034b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/inkern.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/inkern.c
> > @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ struct iio_channel *iio_channel_get(const char
> *name, const char *channel_name)
> >
> >  	channel = kzalloc(sizeof(*channel), GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	if (channel == NULL)
> > -		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > +		goto error_no_mem;
> >
> >  	channel->indio_dev = c->indio_dev;
> >
> > @@ -151,6 +151,9 @@ error_no_chan:
> >  	iio_device_put(c->indio_dev);
> >  	kfree(channel);
> >  	return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > +error_no_mem:
> > +	iio_device_put(c->indio_dev);
> > +	return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iio_channel_get);
> >
> 
> If you do it that way, you don't really need the goto, something like
> 
> error_no_chan:
>   	kfree(channel);
> error_no_mem:
> 	iio_device_put(c->indio_dev);
> 	return ret
> 
> would be better in my opinion. With ret being initialized in the if
> branch
> before the goto.

Thanks for your opinion. I was hesitating before sending ;) 

The reason why this patch need separate goto statement is as below.
 
There are two different types when requesting the channel.
One is a pointer of iio_channel, the other is the error.
So return type will be two - allocated iio_channel and integer.
For simplicity, I would use just one return variable when it runs successfully.
In error cases, do return as explicit name such like ERR_PTR() rather than
saving into local integer.

Just my two cents.
But your code has better readability.

Thank you.

Best Regards,
Milo


--
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/