[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023081213-reset-tadpole-fc94@gregkh>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2023 09:29:42 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Mirsad Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@....unizg.hr>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] test_fimware: return -ENOMEM instead of -ENOSPC
on failed memory allocation
On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 07:43:47AM +0200, Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
> [ Upstream commit 7dae593cd226a0bca61201cf85ceb9335cf63682 ]
>
> In a couple of situations like
>
> name = kstrndup(buf, count, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!name)
> return -ENOSPC;
>
> the error is not actually "No space left on device", but "Out of memory".
>
> It is semantically correct to return -ENOMEM in all failed kstrndup()
> and kzalloc() cases in this driver, as it is not a problem with disk
> space, but with kernel memory allocator failing allocation.
>
> The semantically correct should be:
>
> name = kstrndup(buf, count, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!name)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> Cc: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
> Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...nel.org>
> Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.14
> Fixes: c92316bf8e948 ("test_firmware: add batched firmware tests")
> Fixes: 0a8adf584759c ("test: add firmware_class loader test")
> Fixes: eb910947c82f9 ("test: firmware_class: add asynchronous request trigger")
> Fixes: 061132d2b9c95 ("test_firmware: add test custom fallback trigger")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230606070808.9300-1-mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr/
> Signed-off-by: Mirsad Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@....unizg.hr>
>
> [ This is the backport of the patch to 4.19 and 4.14 branches. There are no ]
> [ semantic differences in the commit. Backport is provided for completenes sake ]
> [ so it would apply to all of the supported LTS kernels ]
This commit is already in the 4.19.291 release, does it need to be
included in there again for some reason?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists