Re: [PATCH v2] ASoC: soc-card: soc-card-test: Fix some error handling in probe()

[Richard Fitzgerald <rf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/4/24 16:31, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 03:43:45PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> > On 10/4/24 15:22, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > Fix this reversed if statement and call put_device() before returning
> > > the error code.
> > >
> > > Fixes: ef7784e41db7 ("ASoC: soc-card: Add KUnit test case for snd_soc_card_get_kcontrol")
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > v2: call put_device()
> > >
> > >    sound/soc/soc-card-test.c | 4 +++-
> > >    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-card-test.c b/sound/soc/soc-card-test.c
> > > index 075c52fe82e5..faf9a3d46884 100644
> > > --- a/sound/soc/soc-card-test.c
> > > +++ b/sound/soc/soc-card-test.c
> > > @@ -148,8 +148,10 @@ static int soc_card_test_case_init(struct kunit *test)
> > >    	priv->card->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > >    	ret = snd_soc_register_card(priv->card);
> > > -	if (!ret)
> > > +	if (ret) {
> > > +		put_device(priv->card_dev);
> > >    		return ret;
> > > +	}
> > >    	return 0;
> > >    }
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Reviewed-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > I can see that put_device() is also missing earlier in the
> > function:
> >
> > 	if (!priv->card)
> > 		return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > I can send a fix for that.
>
> No.  Let me resend.  I'm sorry, this patch has not been up to proper
> standards.  

The same could be said for my original code here.

I suggest moving this block of code _before_ the kunit_device_register()
so there's no need to put_device() if the alloc fails:

	priv->card = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*priv->card), GFP_KERNEL);
	if (!priv->card)
		return -ENOMEM;

Also I should fix Smatch to warn about missing put_device()
> calls to prevent this sort of thing going forward.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter