yep,
there was a patch containing while()/free(), i guessed the comment
was accidentaly copied (or do i mixup something ?)
forget about it, the comment was confusing me.
IMHO it is the wrong way around.
I would say:
sightly rearrange the code:
- use kasprintf instead of kzalloc/sprintf to simplify code and avoid a
magic number
If an error occurs in the for_each loop, clk_name must be freed.
goto bail_out;
as side effect more that 9 clk_cpu are now correctly shown.
hope that helps,
re,
wh
________________________________________
Von: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Freitag, 23. April 2021 14:02:17
An: Walter Harms; mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx; sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx; gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxx; thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: AW: [PATCH 1/4] clk: mvebu: Fix a memory leak in an error handling path
WARNUNG: Diese E-Mail kam von außerhalb der Organisation. Klicken Sie nicht auf Links oder öffnen Sie keine Anhänge, es sei denn, Sie kennen den/die Absender*in und wissen, dass der Inhalt sicher ist.
Le 23/04/2021 à 13:42, Walter Harms a écrit :
> nitpicking:
> clk_name could be replaced with cpuclk[cpu].clk_name
Agreed, Thx.
I'll wait a few days to see if there are other comments before sending a
v2. (especially if 4/4 is correct or not)
I'll also add "clk-cpu:" after "clk: mvebu:"
> and the commit msg is from the other patch (free cpuclk[cpu].clk_name)
>
But here, I don't follow you.
What do you mean? Which other patch?
Do you mean that the commit message has to be updated accordingly?
(ie: s/clk_name/cpuclk[cpu].clk_name/ must be freed)
> jm2c,
>
> re,
> wh
> ________________________________________
> Von: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 23. April 2021 08:25:01
> An: mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx; sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx; gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxx; thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Christophe JAILLET
> Betreff: [PATCH 1/4] clk: mvebu: Fix a memory leak in an error handling path
>
> WARNUNG: Diese E-Mail kam von außerhalb der Organisation. Klicken Sie nicht auf Links oder öffnen Sie keine Anhänge, es sei denn, Sie kennen den/die Absender*in und wissen, dass der Inhalt sicher ist.
>
>
> If an error occurs in the for_each loop, clk_name must be freed.
>
> In order to do so, sightly rearrange the code:
> - move the allocation to simplify error handling
> - use kasprintf instead of kzalloc/sprintf to simplify code and avoid a
> magic number
>
> Fixes: ab8ba01b3fe5 ("clk: mvebu: add armada-370-xp CPU specific clocks")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> The { } around the 1 line block after kasprintf is intentional and makes
> sense with 2/2
> ---
> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c b/drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c
> index c2af3395cf13..a11d7273fcc7 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c
> @@ -195,17 +195,17 @@ static void __init of_cpu_clk_setup(struct device_node *node)
> for_each_of_cpu_node(dn) {
> struct clk_init_data init;
> struct clk *clk;
> - char *clk_name = kzalloc(5, GFP_KERNEL);
> + char *clk_name;
> int cpu, err;
>
> - if (WARN_ON(!clk_name))
> - goto bail_out;
> -
> err = of_property_read_u32(dn, "reg", &cpu);
> if (WARN_ON(err))
> goto bail_out;
>
> - sprintf(clk_name, "cpu%d", cpu);
> + clk_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "cpu%d", cpu);
> + if (WARN_ON(!clk_name)) {
> + goto bail_out;
> + }
>
> cpuclk[cpu].parent_name = of_clk_get_parent_name(node, 0);
> cpuclk[cpu].clk_name = clk_name;
> --
> 2.27.0
>
>
