[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87r0mms4a5.fsf@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 16:40:24 +0200
From: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
To: Chen Ni <nichen@...as.ac.cn>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<pabeni@...hat.com>, <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fjes: Add missing check for vzalloc
Chen Ni <nichen@...as.ac.cn> writes:
> Because of the potential failure of the vzalloc(), the hw->hw_info.trace
> could be NULL.
> Therefore, we need to check it and return -ENOMEM in order to transfer
> the error.
>
> Fixes: b6ba737d0b29 ("fjes: ethtool -w and -W support for fjes driver")
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@...as.ac.cn>
> ---
> drivers/net/fjes/fjes_hw.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/fjes/fjes_hw.c b/drivers/net/fjes/fjes_hw.c
> index 704e949484d0..3a06a3cf021d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/fjes/fjes_hw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/fjes/fjes_hw.c
> @@ -330,6 +330,9 @@ int fjes_hw_init(struct fjes_hw *hw)
> ret = fjes_hw_setup(hw);
>
> hw->hw_info.trace = vzalloc(FJES_DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE);
> + if (!hw->hw_info.trace)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
I'm not sure, but shouldn't this call fjes_hw_cleanup() to mirror the
setup() above? Also only if ret=0 I suppose.
> hw->hw_info.trace_size = FJES_DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE;
>
> return ret;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists