Re: [PATCH v1] soc: bcm: Check for NULL return of devm_kzalloc()

[Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>]

+Rafal,

On 3/24/22 01:35, QintaoShen wrote:
> As the potential failuer of allocation, devm_kzalloc() may return NULL.

s/failuer/failure/

> Then the 'pd->pmb' and the follow lines of code may bring null pointer dereference.
>
> Therefore, it is better to check the return value of devm_kzalloc() to avoid this confusion.
>
> Signed-off-by: QintaoShen <unSimple1993@xxxxxxx>

Fixes: 8bcac4011ebe ("soc: bcm: add PM driver for Broadcom's PMB")

> ---
>   drivers/soc/bcm/bcm63xx/bcm-pmb.c | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/bcm/bcm63xx/bcm-pmb.c b/drivers/soc/bcm/bcm63xx/bcm-pmb.c
> index 7bbe46e..55bf389 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/bcm/bcm63xx/bcm-pmb.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/bcm/bcm63xx/bcm-pmb.c
> @@ -311,6 +311,8 @@ static int bcm_pmb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   
>   	for (e = table; e->name; e++) {
>   		struct bcm_pmb_pm_domain *pd = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pd), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!pd)
> +			return -ENOMEM;

I am of two minds as to what the appropriate behavior could be here, we 
could equally use an:

		if (!pd)
			continue;

or do what you are doing.

>   
>   		pd->pmb = pmb;
>   		pd->data = e;


--
Florian