[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b8adba8-0cfa-4a83-8776-ba7245c58947@web.de>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2025 19:15:23 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Eslam Khafagy <eslam.medhat1993@...il.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@...nel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Max Staudt <max@...as.org>,
Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@...y.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+4f5f81e1456a1f645bf8@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] HID: memory leak in dualshock4_get_calibration_data
> Function dualshock4_get_calibration_data allocates memory to pointer
> buf .However, the function may exit prematurely due to transfer_failure
transfer failure.?
> in this case it does not handle freeing memory.
>
> This patch handles memory deallocation at exit.
Would a corresponding imperative wording become helpful for an improved change description?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.18-rc6#n94
Would a summary phrase like “Prevent memory leak in dualshock4_get_calibration_data()”
be nicer?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists