On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 03:11:45PM +0530, santosh nayak wrote: >> From: Santosh Nayak <santoshprasadnayak@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Replace kmalloc+memset pair by kzalloc() in 'wl_wds_device_alloc()'. >> Add error handling to avoid null derefernce. >> >> Signed-off-by: Santosh Nayak <santoshprasadnayak@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_netdev.c | 8 ++++++-- >> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_netdev.c b/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_netdev.c >> index 9c16f54..426ba04 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_netdev.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_netdev.c >> @@ -1511,8 +1511,12 @@ void wl_wds_device_alloc( struct wl_private *lp ) >> for( count = 0; count < NUM_WDS_PORTS; count++ ) { >> struct net_device *dev_wds = NULL; >> >> - dev_wds = kmalloc( sizeof( struct net_device ), GFP_KERNEL ); >> - memset( dev_wds, 0, sizeof( struct net_device )); >> + dev_wds = kzalloc(sizeof(struct net_device), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (unlikely(!dev_wds)) { > > NEVER use unlikely unless you are working on scheduler code, or > something else equally time critical. So, take this into consideration, > and Dan's comments, and please redo this, I can't take it as-is. > Greg, I will include your suggestion and resend it. Can you please explain whats the disadvantage of having 'unlikely()' here ? I have seen it at several places in driver side. regards Santosh > thanks, > > greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html