On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 03:17:17PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Fix potential memory leak in function parse_events_term__sym_hw()
> > and parse_events_term__clone().
>
> Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message?
>
>
> …
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.c
> …
> > @@ -2957,9 +2958,20 @@ int parse_events_term__sym_hw(struct parse_events_term **term,
> > sym = &event_symbols_hw[idx];
> >
> > str = strdup(sym->symbol);
> > - if (!str)
> > + if (!str) {
> > + if (!config)
> > + free(temp.config);
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > - return new_term(term, &temp, str, 0);
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = new_term(term, &temp, str, 0);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + free(str);
> > + if (!config)
> > + free(temp.config);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > }
> …
>
> How do you think about to add jump targets for a bit of
> common exception handling code in these function implementations?
Hi,
This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.
Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list. I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore. Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.
Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all. The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback. Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot
