linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] cpufreq: loongson: Check for error code from devm_mutex

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAhV-H6bOZLur8Eq2CyFaeQp7R1LwiRqf0ODqnftg6+zAbDoYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 09:29:52 +0800
From: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] cpufreq: loongson: Check for error code from
 devm_mutex_init() call

Hi, Andy,

On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:29 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Even if it's not critical, the avoidance of checking the error code
> from devm_mutex_init() call today diminishes the point of using devm
> variant of it. Tomorrow it may even leak something. Add the missed
> check.
>
> Fixes: ccf51454145b ("cpufreq: Add Loongson-3 CPUFreq driver support")
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/loongson3_cpufreq.c | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/loongson3_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/loongson3_cpufreq.c
> index 61ebebf69455..bd34bf0fafa5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/loongson3_cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/loongson3_cpufreq.c
> @@ -346,8 +346,11 @@ static int loongson3_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>         int i, ret;
>
> -       for (i = 0; i < MAX_PACKAGES; i++)
> -               devm_mutex_init(&pdev->dev, &cpufreq_mutex[i]);
> +       for (i = 0; i < MAX_PACKAGES; i++) {
> +               ret = devm_mutex_init(&pdev->dev, &cpufreq_mutex[i]);
> +               if (ret)
Good catch, but I think "if (ret < 0)" is better? Sometimes a positive
return value is legal, even if not in this case.

And it is better to use loongson3 rather than loongson because there
is another loongson2 driver.

Huacai

> +                       return ret;
> +       }
>
>         ret = do_service_request(0, 0, CMD_GET_VERSION, 0, 0);
>         if (ret <= 0)
> --
> 2.43.0.rc1.1336.g36b5255a03ac
>
>