[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190221165642.00005d86.zbestahu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:56:42 +0800
From: Yue Hu <zbestahu@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com, joe@...ches.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
huyue2@...ong.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/cma_debug: Check for null tmp in
cma_debugfs_add_one()
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 09:23:09 +0100
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu 21-02-19 12:01:30, Yue Hu wrote:
> > From: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
> >
> > If debugfs_create_dir() failed, the following debugfs_create_file()
> > will be meanless since it depends on non-NULL tmp dentry and it will
> > only waste CPU resource.
>
> The file will be created in the debugfs root. But, more importantly.
> Greg (CCed now) is working on removing the failure paths because he
> believes they do not really matter for debugfs and they make code more
> ugly. More importantly a check for NULL is not correct because you
> get ERR_PTR after recent changes IIRC.
Same check logic in cma_debugfs_init(), i'm just finding they do not stay
the same.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
> > ---
> > mm/cma_debug.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/cma_debug.c b/mm/cma_debug.c
> > index 2c2c869..3e9d984 100644
> > --- a/mm/cma_debug.c
> > +++ b/mm/cma_debug.c
> > @@ -169,6 +169,8 @@ static void cma_debugfs_add_one(struct cma *cma, struct dentry *root_dentry)
> > scnprintf(name, sizeof(name), "cma-%s", cma->name);
> >
> > tmp = debugfs_create_dir(name, root_dentry);
> > + if (!tmp)
> > + return;
> >
> > debugfs_create_file("alloc", 0200, tmp, cma, &cma_alloc_fops);
> > debugfs_create_file("free", 0200, tmp, cma, &cma_free_fops);
> > --
> > 1.9.1
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists