linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/perf/hv-24x7: use kmem_cache instead of aligned stack allocations

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: <537E8E1F.9020303@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 16:54:07 -0700
From:	Cody P Schafer <cody@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, peterz@...radead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michael@...erman.id.au,
	mingo@...hat.com, paulus@...ba.org, imunsie@....ibm.com,
	acme@...stprotocols.net, scottwood@...escale.com,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/perf/hv-24x7: use kmem_cache instead of aligned
 stack allocations

On 05/22/2014 04:49 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Cody,
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2014 15:44:25 -0700 Cody P Schafer <cody@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>>   	if (ret) {
>>   		if (success_expected)
>>   			pr_err_ratelimited("hcall failed: %d %#x %#x %d => 0x%lx (%ld) detail=0x%x failing ix=%x\n",
>>   					domain, offset, ix, lpar,
>>   					ret, ret,
>> -					result_buffer.buf.detailed_rc,
>> -					result_buffer.buf.failing_request_ix);
>> -		return ret;
>> +					result_buffer->buf.detailed_rc,
>> +					result_buffer->buf.failing_request_ix);
>> +		goto out_hcall;
>>   	}
>>
>> -	*res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer.result);
>> +	*res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer->result);
>
> not a biggie, but this last bit could be (remove the goto out_hcall and
> teh label and then)
>
> 	} else {
> 		*res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer->result);
> 	}
>

I've got a slight preference toward keeping it as is, which lets all of 
the non-error path code stay outside of if/else blocks (and the error 
handling is kept ever so slightly more consistent).

>> +out_hcall:
>> +	kfree(result_buffer);
>> +out_resb:
>> +	kfree(request_buffer);
>> +out_reqb:
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>
>
> otherwise looks good to me.
>

--
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/