linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] acpi/hmat: fix memory leaks in hmat

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 09 Apr 2019 11:33:16 -0400
From:   Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] acpi/hmat: fix memory leaks in hmat_init()

On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 16:54 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Fewer jumps are easier to follow in general, so avoiding ones that can
> be avoided is helpful.
> 
> I'm not buying the argument about more code line changes needed if the
> function name changes.  It's meaningless.
> 
> And if you check the return value of acpi_get_table() for SRAT after
> calling acpi_put_table(tbl), you will only need the out_free label, if
> I'm not mistaken.

I don't really understand this.

status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_SRAT
acpi_put_table(tbl);
status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_HMAT

If acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_SRAT failed, there is no point calling
acpi_put_table(), so what is the point checking return value of acpi_get_table()
for SRAT after acpi_put_table() ?