Hi, On 5/12/2018 1:46 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi, On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Lina Iyer <ilina@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:/** @@ -137,6 +140,8 @@ void rpmh_tx_done(const struct tcs_request *msg, int r) dev_err(rpm_msg->dev, "RPMH TX fail in msg addr=%#x, err=%d\n", rpm_msg->msg.cmds[0].addr, r); + kfree(rpm_msg->free); +The way the code is written makes it seem like you could free memory _and_ have a completion but you can't. Specifically: * The only plausible thing that "rpm_msg->free" could point to is "rpm_msg". * The complete(compl) would then be accessing freed memory.
As the completions are declared on stack, it will not access freed memory.
I believe the kfree() should be at the end of the function. Personally I'd make it more obvious that this is just a boolean value and change to: if (rpm_msg->needs_free) kgree(rpm_msg) ...then the reader of the code doesn't need to go figure out what you're trying to free. -Doug
Yes. Will change it this way in next patch set. Thanks, Raju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
