linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] regulator: s2mps11: Copy supported regulators from initconst

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:	Fri, 14 Feb 2014 08:46:59 +0100
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Yadwinder Singh Brar <yadi.brar01@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] regulator: s2mps11: Copy supported regulators
 from initconst

On Thu, 2014-02-13 at 19:07 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:14:00AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 
> > -	for (i = 0; i < S2MPS11_REGULATOR_CNT; i++)
> > +	s2mps11->rdev = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
> > +			sizeof(*s2mps11->rdev)*rdev_num, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!s2mps11->rdev)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> If we're using managed allocations do we actually need to keep the rdev
> table at all?  We only normally use it to free.

You're right, the "s2mps11->rdev" is not needed at all.

> 
> > +	rdata = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*rdata)*rdev_num, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!rdata)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> 
> > +	/* rdata was needed only for of_regulator_match() during probe */
> > +	if (rdata)
> > +		devm_kfree(&pdev->dev, rdata);
> > +
> 
> If this is always going to be freed within the probe path (in the same
> function indeed) why is it a managed allocaton at all?

Actually no good reason, simplifies a little the return statements on
error conditions. I'll use kzalloc() and kfree().

Best regards,
Krzysztof

--
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/