[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dd8cb3dc-8ac8-408c-845d-af60307d72e4@web.de>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:55:29 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Guanrui Huang <guanrui.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Fix double free on error
I propose to improve the commit message another bit.
How do you think about to append the text “in its_vpe_irq_domain_alloc()”
to the summary phrase?
> In its_vpe_irq_domain_alloc, when its_vpe_init() returns an error
> with i > 0, its_vpe_irq_domain_free may free bitmap and vprop_page,
> and then there is a double free in its_vpe_irq_domain_alloc.
Can it be nicer to avoid the duplicate specification of a function name
in this change description?
> Fix it by calling its_vpe_irq_domain_free directly, bitmap and
> vprop_page will be freed in this function.
* Can the phrase “Fix it by” be omitted for an other imperative wording variant?
* Would you like to separate sentences by a dot instead of combining them
with a comma?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists