[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b3db4d2.ddd1e.1726e53d54b.Coremail.dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:21:27 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
From: dinghao.liu@....edu.cn
To: "Ben Skeggs" <skeggsb@...il.com>
Cc: kjlu@....edu, "David Airlie" <airlied@...ux.ie>,
"ML nouveau" <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ML dri-devel" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"Ben Skeggs" <bskeggs@...hat.com>, Markus.Elfring@....de
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/clk/gm20b: Fix memory leak in
gm20b_clk_new
> > If there's *any* error, it'll check the pointer, if it's non-NULL,
> > it'll call the destructor. If kzalloc() fails, the pointer will be
> > NULL, there's no double-free bug. *every* subdev is written this way
> > to avoid duplicating cleanup logic.
> Actually, gm20b_clk_new_speedo0() may have a bug here if kzalloc()
> fails as it doesn't overwrite the previous pointer from
> gm20b_clk_new(). That whole ctor() sequence is written a little
> strangely.
>
It's clear to me, thank your for your explanation! As for
gm20b_clk_new_speedo0(), I think its bug pattern is not very
clear. Maybe we should keep it until we find an use chain that
could lead to a bug.
Regards,
Dinghao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists