Zitat von Oliver Neukum <oneukum@xxxxxxxx>:
On Mo, 2018-09-24 at 10:56 +0000, guido@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Zitat von Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:24:10AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > how should I mark fixes intended for the testing branch?
> > I got one for the usbtmc driver.
>
> Just send it like normal. You can do a "Fixes:" tag with the sha1, that
> should be fine. I need to push out my testing branch now, 0-day seems
> to be stalled :(
>
Big sorry! There is a superflous kmalloc line 1270 til 1272.
Shall I send the fix?
Damn. That is the same allocation repeated, not a reuse of the buffer.
I'll resend. There is also a leak in the error case.
I do not see a leak in the error case. kfree(NULL) should be ok.
Sorry, I referred the line 1270 to the mail of Dan Carpenter. I mean the
lines:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/class/usbtmc.c b/drivers/usb/class/usbtmc.c
index 0fcb81a1399b..dfbcf418dad7 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/class/usbtmc.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/class/usbtmc.c
@@ -1895,10 +1895,6 @@ static int usbtmc_ioctl_request(struct
usbtmc_device_data *data,
if (res)
return -EFAULT;
- buffer = kmalloc(request.req.wLength, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!buffer)
- return -ENOMEM;
-
if (request.req.wLength > USBTMC_BUFSIZE)
return -EMSGSIZE;
@Oliver: Where do send (resend) the fix? Is this an official fix or
do you just fix your internal build system?
And I still have to make an official fix, isn't it?
Guido
