linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usnic: corretly check failed allocation

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: <1D90F355-D799-4E9E-9526-836B71355109@cisco.com>
Date:	Thu, 15 Oct 2015 17:17:57 +0000
From:	"Dave Goodell (dgoodell)" <dgoodell@...co.com>
To:	Insu Yun <wuninsu@...il.com>
CC:	"umalhi@...co.com" <umalhi@...co.com>,
	"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
	"sean.hefty@...el.com" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	"hal.rosenstock@...il.com" <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"taesoo@...ech.edu" <taesoo@...ech.edu>,
	"yeongjin.jang@...ech.edu" <yeongjin.jang@...ech.edu>,
	"insu@...ech.edu" <insu@...ech.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usnic: corretly check failed allocation

On Oct 15, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Insu Yun <wuninsu@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> Since ib_alloc_device returns allocated memory address, not error, 
> it should be checked as IS_NULL, not IS_ERR_OR_NULL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Insu Yun <wuninsu@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

There's a typo in the subject ("corretly"-->"correctly").

Out of curiosity, what led you to spot this?  General code inspection or did this come out of some tool?

> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c
> index 34c49b8..7c5f602 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c
> @@ -328,14 +328,14 @@ static void *usnic_ib_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev)
> 	netdev = pci_get_drvdata(dev);
> 
> 	us_ibdev = (struct usnic_ib_dev *)ib_alloc_device(sizeof(*us_ibdev));
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(us_ibdev)) {
> +	if (!us_ibdev) {
> 		usnic_err("Device %s context alloc failed\n",
> 				netdev_name(pci_get_drvdata(dev)));
> 		return ERR_PTR(us_ibdev ? PTR_ERR(us_ibdev) : -EFAULT);

I think this can become:

return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);

> 	}
> 
> 	us_ibdev->ufdev = usnic_fwd_dev_alloc(dev);
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(us_ibdev->ufdev)) {
> +	if (!us_ibdev->ufdev) {
> 		usnic_err("Failed to alloc ufdev for %s with err %ld\n",
> 				pci_name(dev), PTR_ERR(us_ibdev->ufdev));

This PTR_ERR and message make less sense now.

-Dave

--
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/