linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: sparc: Fix exception handling in two functions

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

Message-ID: <20230403230432.xeubpa3cc2gt4mw3@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Tue, 4 Apr 2023 04:34:32 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, cocci@...ia.fr,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: sparc: Fix exception handling in two functions

On 03-04-23, 14:50, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/sparc-us2e-cpufreq.c
> >> @@ -324,12 +324,12 @@ static int __init us2e_freq_init(void)
> >>  		ret = -ENOMEM;
> >>  		driver = kzalloc(sizeof(*driver), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>  		if (!driver)
> >> -			goto err_out;
> >> +			goto reset_freq_table;
> >
> > I would just return error from here.
> 
> I got the impression from this function implementation that a bit of additional
> resource release would be relevant so far (at the end of a corresponding if branch).

That is exactly what you are looking to fix, so lets fix it once and
for all.

-- 
viresh