[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <285fab33-0513-8a6b-f30d-f602c4e5108e@web.de>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 12:55:22 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>,
Stephen McCamant <smccaman@....edu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: clk: samsung: Checking a kmemdup() call in
_samsung_clk_register_pll()
>> * Is there a need to adjust the error handling here?
>
> No, there isn't much that can be done if we fail the allocation at
> such an early stage.
Can it matter to perform the setting “pll->rate_count” only according
to a null pointer check for the variable “pll->rate_table”
because of the function call “kmemdup”?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists