Hi,
Crashing on a null pointer deref is never a nice thing to do. It seems to
me that it's better to simply return UWB_RSV_ALLOC_NOT_FOUND if kzalloc()
fails in uwb_rsv_find_best_allocation().
I may be wrong since I have no way to test this (except compile test) and
this is unknown code to me, so please review carefully.
Please CC me on replies.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
---
allocator.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/uwb/allocator.c b/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
index 436e4f7..e45e673 100644
--- a/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
+++ b/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
@@ -326,7 +326,8 @@ int uwb_rsv_find_best_allocation(struct uwb_rsv *rsv, struct uwb_mas_bm *availab
int bit_index;
ai = kzalloc(sizeof(struct uwb_rsv_alloc_info), GFP_KERNEL);
-
+ if (!ai)
+ return UWB_RSV_ALLOC_NOT_FOUND;
ai->min_mas = rsv->min_mas;
ai->max_mas = rsv->max_mas;
ai->max_interval = rsv->max_interval;
--
Jesper Juhl <[email protected]> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Crashing on a null pointer deref is never a nice thing to do. It seems to
> me that it's better to simply return UWB_RSV_ALLOC_NOT_FOUND if kzalloc()
> fails in uwb_rsv_find_best_allocation().
This is fine.
struct uwb_rsv_alloc_info is not that large (about 414 bytes I think) so
it could possibly go on the stack and avoid the allocation.
Acked-by: David Vrabel <[email protected]>
Greg, seeing as I'm not maintaining the UWB subsystem any more do you
want to pick this (and future) UWB patches?
David
> I may be wrong since I have no way to test this (except compile test) and
> this is unknown code to me, so please review carefully.
>
> Please CC me on replies.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
> ---
> allocator.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/uwb/allocator.c b/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
> index 436e4f7..e45e673 100644
> --- a/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
> +++ b/drivers/uwb/allocator.c
> @@ -326,7 +326,8 @@ int uwb_rsv_find_best_allocation(struct uwb_rsv *rsv, struct uwb_mas_bm *availab
> int bit_index;
>
> ai = kzalloc(sizeof(struct uwb_rsv_alloc_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> -
> + if (!ai)
> + return UWB_RSV_ALLOC_NOT_FOUND;
> ai->min_mas = rsv->min_mas;
> ai->max_mas = rsv->max_mas;
> ai->max_interval = rsv->max_interval;
--
David Vrabel, Senior Software Engineer, Drivers
CSR, Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Tel: +44 (0)1223 692562
Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ http://www.csr.com/
Member of the CSR plc group of companies. CSR plc registered in England and Wales, registered number 4187346, registered office Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 12:43:02PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Crashing on a null pointer deref is never a nice thing to do. It seems to
> > me that it's better to simply return UWB_RSV_ALLOC_NOT_FOUND if kzalloc()
> > fails in uwb_rsv_find_best_allocation().
>
> This is fine.
>
> struct uwb_rsv_alloc_info is not that large (about 414 bytes I think) so
> it could possibly go on the stack and avoid the allocation.
>
> Acked-by: David Vrabel <[email protected]>
>
> Greg, seeing as I'm not maintaining the UWB subsystem any more do you
> want to pick this (and future) UWB patches?
Yes, I can do that, and will take this one.
thanks,
greg k-h