Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] platform/x86:intel/pmc: Check return value of ioremap

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 8/29/2024 4:06 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024, Xi Pardee wrote:

Check the return value of ioremap operation and return ENOMEM when
the operation fails for better error handling.

Signed-off-by: Xi Pardee <xi.pardee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/ssram_telemetry.c | 3 +++
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/ssram_telemetry.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/ssram_telemetry.c
index 73c727042ca6..f625d39d1aa3 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/ssram_telemetry.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/ssram_telemetry.c
@@ -84,6 +84,9 @@ pmc_core_ssram_get_pmc(struct pmc_dev *pmcdev, unsigned int pmc_idx, u32 offset)
  	ssram_base = ssram_pcidev->resource[0].start;
  	tmp_ssram = ioremap(ssram_base, SSRAM_HDR_SIZE);
+ if (!tmp_ssram)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
  	if (pmc_idx != PMC_IDX_MAIN) {
  		/*
  		 * The secondary PMC BARS (which are behind hidden PCI devices)
Is this a fix to the current code? And should have Fixes tag and go
first because of that?
This is an improvement of the current code. We should check the value of ioremap before using it to avoid failure in the later process. I can add a fixes tag to it. Should this patch be its own patch series and not include in this one? Or should it be moved to be the first patch of this series?

Thanks!
Xi





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux