linux-kernel - Re: drm/nouveau/clk/gm20b: Understanding challenges around gm20b_clk

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

Date:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 07:04:37 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>
Subject: Re: drm/nouveau/clk/gm20b: Understanding challenges around
 gm20b_clk_new()

> Ben has explained this problem:
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1249592/
> Since the caller will check "pclk" on failure, we don't need to free
> "clk" in gm20b_clk_new() and I think this patch is no longer needed.

* I am curious if it can become easier to see the relationships for
  these variables according to mentioned “destructor” calls.

* Did you notice opportunities to improve source code analysis
  (or software documentation) accordingly?

Regards,
Markus