linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 4/4] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Fix error with S24

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AM6PR04MB6470AFE4170063A6F1429C33E3860@AM6PR04MB6470.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Sep 2019 03:57:16 +0000
From:   "S.j. Wang" <shengjiu.wang@....com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
CC:     "timur@...nel.org" <timur@...nel.org>,
        "Xiubo.Lee@...il.com" <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "perex@...ex.cz" <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "tiwai@...e.com" <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lars@...afoo.de" <lars@...afoo.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/4] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Fix error with S24_3LE format
 bitstream in i.MX8

Hi

> Just a small concern...
> 
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:29:51AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> >  static int fsl_asrc_dma_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
> > {
> > +
> > +     release_pair = false;
> > +     ret = snd_soc_set_runtime_hwparams(substream,
> > + &snd_imx_hardware);
> 
> This set_runtime_hwparams() always returns 0 for now, but if one day it
> changes and it fails here, kfree() will be still ignored although the startup()
> gets error-out.
> 
> We could avoid this if we continue to ignore the return value like the
> current code. Or we may check ret at kfree() also?

I like to ignore the return value.

Best regards
Wang shengjiu