netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/11] devlink: Add health buffer support

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: <8c2185c4-ebb4-8fb2-a8ca-e523cd267f7b@mellanox.com>
Date:   Sun, 20 Jan 2019 11:06:18 +0000
From:   Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ariel Almog <ariela@...lanox.com>,
        Aya Levin <ayal@...lanox.com>,
        Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/11] devlink: Add health buffer support



On 1/20/2019 12:03 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 10:59:10PM CET, eranbe@...lanox.com wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static void
>> +devlink_health_buffers_destroy(struct devlink_health_buffer **buffers_list,
>> +			       u64 size);
> 
> Avoid fwd declarations.
> 
> 
>> +
>> +static struct devlink_health_buffer **
>> +devlink_health_buffers_create(u64 size)
>> +{
>> +	struct devlink_health_buffer **buffers_list;
>> +	u64 num_of_buffers = DEVLINK_HEALTH_SIZE_TO_BUFFERS(size);
>> +	u64 i;
>> +
>> +	buffers_list = kcalloc(num_of_buffers,
>> +			       sizeof(struct devlink_health_buffer *),
>> +			       GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!buffers_list)
>> +		return NULL;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < num_of_buffers; i++) {
>> +		struct devlink_health_buffer *buffer;
>> +		void *data;
>> +
>> +		buffer = kzalloc(sizeof(*buffer), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +		data = kzalloc(DEVLINK_HEALTH_BUFFER_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +		if (!buffer || !data) {
>> +			kfree(buffer);
>> +			kfree(data);
>> +			goto buffers_cleanup;
>> +		}
>> +		buffers_list[i] = buffer;
>> +		buffer->data = data;
>> +	}
>> +	devlink_health_buffers_reset(buffers_list, num_of_buffers);
>> +
>> +	return buffers_list;
>> +
>> +buffers_cleanup:
>> +	devlink_health_buffers_destroy(buffers_list, --i);
> 
> Just do for-kfree here.
> 
> 
>> +	kfree(buffers_list);
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void
>> +devlink_health_buffers_destroy(struct devlink_health_buffer **buffers_list,
>> +			       u64 num_of_buffers)
>> +{
>> +	u64 i;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < num_of_buffers; i++) {
>> +		kfree(buffers_list[i]->data);
>> +		kfree(buffers_list[i]);
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
> 
> [...]
> 

Hi Jiri,
The series is merged. I can take the relevant comments as send as fix 
with the rest of the series if you wish to.

Eran