[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9e390783-05c5-47fc-a0c6-b95e249fe691@web.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:50:36 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/msm/adreno: Add a null pointer check in
zap_shader_load_mdt()
> kasprintf() returns a pointer to dynamically allocated memory
> which can be NULL upon failure. Ensure the allocation was successful
> by checking the pointer validity.
…
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.c
> @@ -144,6 +144,10 @@ static int zap_shader_load_mdt(struct msm_gpu *gpu, const char *fwname,
> char *newname;
>
> newname = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "qcom/%s", fwname);
> + if (!newname) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
…
How do you think about to avoid the repetition of the pointer check
for the variable “mem_region”?
Can the usage of other labels become more appropriate?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists