Re: [PATCH] selftests: memcg: uninitialized variable in test_memcg_reclaim()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 2:29 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:27:36AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> >
> > Nit: keep the cleanup_* naming for labels to make it obvious and to be
> > consistent with the rest of the file (e.g. cleanup_free,
> > cleanup_memcg, cleanup_file/cleanup_all). See
> > test_memcg_subtree_control().
> >
> > I would honestly have one label to cleanup the memcg. Calling
> > cg_destroy() on a non-existent memcg should be fine. rmdir() will just
> > fail silently. All other tests do this and it's easier to read when we
> > have fewer return paths. My advice would be cleanup_file and
> > cleanup_memcg labels.
>
> One error label handling is very bug prone.  You always end up freeing
> things which have not been initialized/allocated.  Or dereferencing
> pointers which are NULL.  Or, since most kernel functions clean up
> after themselves, you end up double freeing things.

I am not suggesting a single cleanup label, I said "one label to
cleanup the memcg", which is separate from cleaning up the file.
Basically just merging the destroy_memcg and free_memcg labels to be
consistent with other tests. I don't feel strongly about this anyway
:)

>
> regards,
> dan carpenter



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux