+ Marcel
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 07:27:12PM +0100, Keisuke Nishimura wrote:
> ca8210_test_interface_init() returns the result of kfifo_alloc(),
> which can be non-zero in case of an error. The caller, ca8210_probe(),
> should check the return value and do error-handling if it fails.
>
> Fixes: ded845a781a5 ("ieee802154: Add CA8210 IEEE 802.15.4 device driver")
> Signed-off-by: Keisuke Nishimura <keisuke.nishimura@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> index e685a7f946f0..753215ebc67c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> @@ -3072,7 +3072,11 @@ static int ca8210_probe(struct spi_device *spi_device)
> spi_set_drvdata(priv->spi, priv);
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IEEE802154_CA8210_DEBUGFS)) {
> cascoda_api_upstream = ca8210_test_int_driver_write;
> - ca8210_test_interface_init(priv);
> + ret = ca8210_test_interface_init(priv);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_crit(&spi_device->dev, "ca8210_test_interface_init failed\n");
> + goto error;
Hi Nishimura-san,
I see that this will conditionally call kfifo_free().
Is that safe here? And in branches to error above this point?
> + }
> } else {
> cascoda_api_upstream = NULL;
> }
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
