[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdwLPkzE9AHkXg=+vsagh4SGam40vz8uRdSRUpr6Cyv7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 14:45:50 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: QintaoShen <unSimple1993@....com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] pinctrl: ralink: rt2880: Check for return value of devm_kcalloc()
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 11:36 AM QintaoShen <unSimple1993@....com> wrote:
>
> The memory allocation function devm_kcalloc() may return NULL pointer,
may --> might
> so it is better to add a check for 'p->func[i]->pins' to avoid possible
> NULL pointer dereference.
...
> @@ -266,6 +266,10 @@ static int rt2880_pinmux_pins(struct rt2880_priv *p)
> p->func[i]->pin_count,
> sizeof(int),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> +
Stray change. Also it seems it has trailing space character(s).
> + if (!p->func[i]->pins)
> + continue;
Why is 'continue' the proper choice here? No clarification is given in
the commit message.
> for (j = 0; j < p->func[i]->pin_count; j++)
> p->func[i]->pins[j] = p->func[i]->pin_first + j;
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists