linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: android: ion: Add ion driver for Hi6220 SoC platform

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: <5618AB25.908@hisilicon.com>
Date:	Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:07:33 +0800
From:	chenfeng <puck.chen@...ilicon.com>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
CC:	<dan.zhao@...ilicon.com>, <w.f@...wei.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
	<paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>, <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
	<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <xuyiping@...ilicon.com>,
	<tapaswenipathak@...il.com>, <tranmanphong@...il.com>,
	<z.liuxinliang@...ilicon.com>, <kong.kongxinwei@...ilicon.com>,
	<qijiwen@...ilicon.com>, <weidong2@...ilicon.com>,
	<suzhuangluan@...ilicon.com>, <riandrews@...roid.com>,
	<gioh.kim@....com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<peter.panshilin@...ilicon.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<arve@...roid.com>, <saberlily.xia@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: android: ion: Add ion driver for Hi6220 SoC
 platform



On 2015/10/9 16:58, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:53:32AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> +out:
>>
>> Labels named "out" are bug prone because handling everything is harder
>> than using named labels and unwinding one step at a time.  The bug here
>> is that we don't call ion_device_destroy().
>>
>>> +	for (i = 0; i < num_heaps; ++i)
>>> +		ion_heap_destroy(heaps[i]);
>>> +	return err;
>>
>> Write it like this:
>>
>> err_free_heaps:
>> 	for (i = 0; i < num_heaps; ++i)
>> 		ion_heap_destroy(heaps[i]);
>> err_free_idev:
>> 	ion_device_destroy(idev);
>>
>> 	return err;
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int hi6220_ion_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +	int i;
>>> +
>>> +	ion_device_destroy(idev);
>>> +	for (i = 0; i < num_heaps; i++) {
>>> +		if (!heaps[i])
>>> +			continue;
>>
>> We don't really need this NULL check and it isn't there in the
>> hi6220_ion_probe() unwind code.
>>
>>> +		ion_heap_destroy(heaps[i]);
>>> +		heaps[i] = NULL;
>>> +	}
>>> +
> 
> Really the unwind from probe() and the remove() function should have
> similar code.  For example, is it important to set heaps[i] to NULL?
> If so then we should do it in the probe function as well.  If not then
> we could leave it out of the remove function.
> 
> Also the ion_device_destroy(idev) should be after freeing heaps in the
> remove function.
> 
Thanks.
I will modify this next version.

> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 
> 
> .
> 

--
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/