[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e6b7c24026e3750ea3e10a5ebf26bf2dd903e2a1.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 12:56:08 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch,
sgoutham@...vell.com, lcherian@...vell.com, gakula@...vell.com,
jerinj@...vell.com, sbhatta@...vell.com, naveenm@...vel.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
jiri@...nulli.us, maxtram95@...il.com
Subject: Re: [net-next Patch v5 5/6] octeontx2-pf: Add support for HTB
offload
On Sun, 2023-03-26 at 23:42 +0530, Hariprasad Kelam wrote:
[...]
> +static int otx2_qos_root_add(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, u16 htb_maj_id, u16 htb_defcls,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct otx2_qos_cfg *new_cfg;
> + struct otx2_qos_node *root;
> + int err;
> +
> + netdev_dbg(pfvf->netdev,
> + "TC_HTB_CREATE: handle=0x%x defcls=0x%x\n",
> + htb_maj_id, htb_defcls);
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pfvf->qos.qos_tree);
> + mutex_init(&pfvf->qos.qos_lock);
It's quite strange and error prone dynamically init this mutex and the
list here. Why don't you do such init ad device creation time?
> +
> + root = otx2_qos_alloc_root(pfvf);
> + if (IS_ERR(root)) {
> + mutex_destroy(&pfvf->qos.qos_lock);
> + err = PTR_ERR(root);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + /* allocate txschq queue */
> + new_cfg = kzalloc(sizeof(*new_cfg), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!new_cfg) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Memory allocation error");
Here the root node is leaked.
> + mutex_destroy(&pfvf->qos.qos_lock);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
[...]
Cheers,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists