On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:47:14PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > index 59edbe9d4ccb..0179f0fd8a79 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ static bool microcode_matches(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header, > return false; > } > > -static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size) > +static struct ucode_patch *memdup_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > { > struct ucode_patch *p; > > @@ -183,11 +183,13 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > if (mc_hdr->rev <= mc_saved_hdr->rev) > continue; > > - p = __alloc_microcode_buf(data, size); > - if (IS_ERR(p)) > + p = memdup_patch(data, size); > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { > pr_err("Error allocating buffer %p\n", data); > - else > - list_replace(&iter->plist, &p->plist); > + continue; > + } > + > + list_replace(&iter->plist, &p->plist); > } > } > This is just cleanups and doesn't change the behavior. > @@ -196,11 +198,12 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > * newly found. > */ > if (!prev_found) { > - p = __alloc_microcode_buf(data, size); > - if (IS_ERR(p)) > + p = memdup_patch(data, size); > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { > pr_err("Error allocating buffer for %p\n", data); > - else > - list_add_tail(&p->plist, µcode_cache); > + return; > + } > + list_add_tail(&p->plist, µcode_cache); > } The static checker is still going to complain about the error pointer from the loop. Perhaps we should only set prev_found if the memdup_patch() inside the loop succeeds? regards, dan carpenter -- 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