linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] regulator: fixed: update to devm

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: <CAKDJKT5z=-CmK+goocgdqy2eQMZN2tsoPgzOFk4KbFTTTiUNAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:31:32 +0530
From:	Manish Badarkhe <badarkhe.manish@...il.com>
To:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] regulator: fixed: update to devm_* API

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 28. January 2014 14:16:39 Manish Badarkhe wrote:
>> Hi Heiko
>>
>> Thank you for your reply.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, 28. January 2014 12:46:01 Manish Badarkhe wrote:
>> >> Hi Dmitry,
>> >>
>> >> Thank you for your review.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
>> >>
>> >> <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Manish,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 08:42:00AM +0530, Manish Badarkhe wrote:
>> >> >> Update the code to use devm_* API so that driver core will manage
>> >> >> resources.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Manish Badarkhe <badarkhe.manish@...il.com>
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >> Changes since V1:
>> >> >> 1. Updated driver to use "devm_kzalloc" to "kstrdup".
>> >> >> 2. Updated commit message.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not tested on any board.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> :100644 100644 5ea64b9... e9763a4... M
>> >> >> :drivers/regulator/fixed.c
>> >> >> :
>> >> >>  drivers/regulator/fixed.c |   42
>> >> >>  ++++++++++++------------------------------
>> >> >>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/fixed.c b/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
>> >> >> index 5ea64b9..e9763a4 100644
>> >> >> --- a/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
>> >> >> +++ b/drivers/regulator/fixed.c
>> >> >> @@ -132,15 +132,15 @@ static int reg_fixed_voltage_probe(struct
>> >> >> platform_device *pdev)>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>                              GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> >>
>> >> >>       if (drvdata == NULL) {
>> >> >>
>> >> >>               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to allocate device data\n");
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -             ret = -ENOMEM;
>> >> >> -             goto err;
>> >> >> +             return -ENOMEM;
>> >> >>
>> >> >>       }
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -     drvdata->desc.name = kstrdup(config->supply_name, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> >> +     drvdata->desc.name = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
>> >> >> +                                       strlen(config->supply_name) +
>> >> >> 1,
>> >> >> +                                       GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> >>
>> >> >>       if (drvdata->desc.name == NULL) {
>> >> >>
>> >> >>               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to allocate supply name\n");
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -             ret = -ENOMEM;
>> >> >> -             goto err;
>> >> >> +             return -ENOMEM;
>> >> >>
>> >> >>       }
>> >> >
>> >> > Umm, I am fairly certain that devm_kzalloc() can't be used as a
>> >> > substitute for kstrdup, at least not without accompanying memcpy.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, I have provided allocation but it should be followed with
>> >> assignment.
>> >> Can I modify like this,
>> >>
>> >> +     drvdata->desc.name = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
>> >> +                                       strlen(config->supply_name) + 1,
>> >> +                                       GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> +     if (drvdata->desc.name)
>> >> +     sprintf(drvdata->desc.name, "%s", config->supply_name);
>> >
>> > hmm, so you replaced a general helper function by open coding the string-
>> > duplication. Doesn't this defeat the target of simplifying the code?
>>
>> Intention here, is to use devm_ API and to adopt this I have to do these
>> modifications for "kstrdup" functions. I have seen in regulator folder
>> almost all drivers adopted to "devm_" API. Hence same thing I am following
>> to update this driver. Please let me know whether to go ahead with this
>> patch or retain driver as it is.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion on this and others are most likely more qualified
> to have a definitive answer, I just found it strange to exchange one open-coded
> pattern against another open-coded one.
>
> So don't let me keep you from it ;-)

Okay.
@Mark, Dmitry: Please let me know your opinion on this.

Thanks
Manish Badarkhe
--
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/