linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [v2] scsi: zfcp: Fix a double put in zfcp_port

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:   Fri, 22 Sep 2023 14:37:39 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>
Cc:     linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Steffen Maier <maier@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Benjamin Block <bblock@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
        Swen Schillig <swen@...t.ibm.com>,
        Christof Schmitt <christof.schmitt@...ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] scsi: zfcp: Fix a double put in zfcp_port_enqueue

On 9/22/23 00:46, Dinghao Liu wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_aux.c b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_aux.c
> index df782646e856..ad0ef9546501 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_aux.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_aux.c
> @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ struct zfcp_port *zfcp_port_enqueue(struct zfcp_adapter *adapter, u64 wwpn,
>   
>   	if (device_register(&port->dev)) {
>   		put_device(&port->dev);
> -		goto err_out;
> +		goto err_register;
>   	}
>   
>   	write_lock_irq(&adapter->port_list_lock);
> @@ -565,5 +565,6 @@ struct zfcp_port *zfcp_port_enqueue(struct zfcp_adapter *adapter, u64 wwpn,
>   
>   err_out:
>   	zfcp_ccw_adapter_put(adapter);
> +err_register:
>   	return ERR_PTR(retval);
>   }

goto labels should be named after the code below the goto label instead
of reflecting where the goto statement comes from.

Thanks,

Bart.