The error handling paths in enic_alloc_vnic_resources()
have called enic_free_vnic_resources() before returning.
So we may not need to call it again on failure at caller
side.
Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/cisco/enic/enic_ethtool.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cisco/enic/enic_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cisco/enic/enic_ethtool.c
index 1a9803f2073e..85a139d39f27 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cisco/enic/enic_ethtool.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cisco/enic/enic_ethtool.c
@@ -235,7 +235,6 @@ static int enic_set_ringparam(struct net_device *netdev,
if (err) {
netdev_err(netdev,
"Failed to alloc vNIC resources, aborting\n");
- enic_free_vnic_resources(enic);
goto err_out;
}
enic_init_vnic_resources(enic);
--
2.17.1
On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:38:33 +0800 Dinghao Liu wrote:
> The error handling paths in enic_alloc_vnic_resources()
> have called enic_free_vnic_resources() before returning.
> So we may not need to call it again on failure at caller
> side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <[email protected]>
But it's harmless, right? So the patch is just a cleanup not a fix?
In that case, could you please repost in two weeks? We're currently
in the merge window period, we're only accepting fixes to the
networking trees.
Thanks!
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 20:38:33 +0800 Dinghao Liu wrote:
> > The error handling paths in enic_alloc_vnic_resources()
> > have called enic_free_vnic_resources() before returning.
> > So we may not need to call it again on failure at caller
> > side.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <[email protected]>
>
> But it's harmless, right? So the patch is just a cleanup not a fix?
>
I think it's harmless. Since there is a check every time before freeing,
calling enic_free_vnic_resources() twice has no security issue.
> In that case, could you please repost in two weeks? We're currently
> in the merge window period, we're only accepting fixes to the
> networking trees.
>
> Thanks!