linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 12/12] PM: EM: Use scope-based cleanup helper

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: <20250903021230.1044454-1-zhangzihuan@kylinos.cn>
Date: Wed,  3 Sep 2025 10:12:30 +0800
From: Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan@...inos.cn>
To: krzk@...nel.org
Cc: airlied@...il.com,
	alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
	beata.michalska@....com,
	ben.horgan@....com,
	bp@...en8.de,
	catalin.marinas@....com,
	cw00.choi@...sung.com,
	daniel.lezcano@...nel.org,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	edubezval@...il.com,
	festevam@...il.com,
	imx@...ts.linux.dev,
	intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	j-keerthy@...com,
	jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
	kernel@...gutronix.de,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com,
	lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	lukasz.luba@....com,
	mpe@...erman.id.au,
	myungjoo.ham@...sung.com,
	pavel@...nel.org,
	ptsm@...ux.microsoft.com,
	rafael@...nel.org,
	rodrigo.vivi@...el.com,
	rui.zhang@...el.com,
	s.hauer@...gutronix.de,
	shawnguo@...nel.org,
	simona@...ll.ch,
	srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
	sudeep.holla@....com,
	sumitg@...dia.com,
	thierry.reding@...il.com,
	tursulin@...ulin.net,
	viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
	will@...nel.org,
	yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
	zhangzihuan@...inos.cn,
	zhenglifeng1@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/12] PM: EM: Use scope-based cleanup helper

> You are not improving the source code here. This is not how to use
>  __free() and you clearly do not understand the source code.

Sorry for the problem, policy should be assigned after cpumask_test_cpu().

I actually realized earlier that __free() only frees at the end of the variable’s lifetime. 
I had suggested using a braced macro in cpufreq.h to allow immediate release after use, 
but I understand the maintainer’s advice to “keep it simple” and will follow that.

> What's more, you did not use standard tools which would tell you this is
> buggy and wrong.

Could you please let me know which standard tools you recommend for detecting such issues? 

I’d like to use them to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

> Don't introduce cleanup.h if you do not understand how it works.

Should I drop this patch?