linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ASoC: SDCA: functions: Fix confusing cleanup.h syntax

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: <aTFv2zyDC13VXg2R@opensource.cirrus.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 11:26:19 +0000
From: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Maciej Strozek <mstrozek@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.dev>,
        linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        patches@...nsource.cirrus.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ASoC: SDCA: functions: Fix confusing cleanup.h syntax

On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 05:12:40PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Initializing automatic __free variables to NULL without need (e.g.
> branches with different allocations), followed by actual allocation is
> in contrary to explicit coding rules guiding cleanup.h:
> 
> "Given that the "__free(...) = NULL" pattern for variables defined at
> the top of the function poses this potential interdependency problem the
> recommendation is to always define and assign variables in one statement
> and not group variable definitions at the top of the function when
> __free() is used."
> 
> Code does not have a bug, but is less readable and uses discouraged
> coding practice, so fix that by moving declaration to the place of
> assignment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
> ---

Hmm... yeah a fair point. Can't say I love the inline
declarations but I guess I will get used to it.

I wonder if for consistency we should do something about
the __free in find_sdca_init_table as well. One could move
the alloc to before the error checks, does risk doing an
unecessary alloc but its on the error path so I don't feel like
performance matters. Or rather than sizeof(*raw) we could just
do sizeof(struct raw_init_write)?

But if you would rather leave as is I don't mind either so:

Reviewed-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>

Thanks,
Charles