Hi Rob,
On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 5:18 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 2:03 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Smatch complains that the error path where "action" is invalid leaks
> > the "ce" allocation:
> > drivers/of/dynamic.c:935 of_changeset_action()
> > warn: possible memory leak of 'ce'
> >
> > Fix this by doing the validation before the allocation.
>
> I'm going to add a note when applying that "action" can't ever
> actually be invalid because all the callers are static inlines with
> hardcoded action values. I suppose there could be an out of tree
> module calling of_changeset_action() directly, but that's wrong given
> the wrappers.
FTR, the out-of-tree overlay configfs patches do not call
of_changeset_action() (or any of the wrappers).
> > Fixes: 914d9d831e61 ("of: dynamic: Refactor action prints to not use "%pOF" inside devtree_lock")
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202309011059.EOdr4im9-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> Despite what that says, it was never reported to me. IOW, the added TO
> and CC lines don't seem to have any effect.
The copy I received did list you in the "To"-header, though.
Fall-out of the issues seen with Gmail lately?
I do miss lots of email, too :-(
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
