2014-07-25 11:31:04

by Pramod Gurav

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2] Input: soc_button_array: Remove kfree on data allocated with devm_zalloc

From: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>

This patch does below:
- Removes kfree done on data allocated with devm_zalloc in probe
path of the driver.
- Adds a check on return value from devm_kzalloc which was missing

CC: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
CC: Lejun Zhu <[email protected]>
CC: Sachin Kamat <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
---
drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 17 +++++++----------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
index 5a6334b..fc64ec6 100644
--- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
+++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
@@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
sizeof(*gpio_keys_pdata) +
sizeof(*gpio_keys) * MAX_NBUTTONS,
GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!gpio_keys_pdata)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
gpio_keys = (void *)(gpio_keys_pdata + 1);

for (info = button_info; info->name; info++) {
@@ -102,20 +105,16 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
n_buttons++;
}

- if (n_buttons == 0) {
- error = -ENODEV;
- goto err_free_mem;
- }
+ if (n_buttons == 0)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);

gpio_keys_pdata->buttons = gpio_keys;
gpio_keys_pdata->nbuttons = n_buttons;
gpio_keys_pdata->rep = autorepeat;

pd = platform_device_alloc("gpio-keys", PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO);
- if (!pd) {
- error = -ENOMEM;
- goto err_free_mem;
- }
+ if (!pd)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

error = platform_device_add_data(pd, gpio_keys_pdata,
sizeof(*gpio_keys_pdata));
@@ -130,8 +129,6 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,

err_free_pdev:
platform_device_put(pd);
-err_free_mem:
- devm_kfree(&pdev->dev, gpio_keys_pdata);
return ERR_PTR(error);
}

--
1.7.9.5


2014-07-25 16:23:06

by Dmitry Torokhov

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: soc_button_array: Remove kfree on data allocated with devm_zalloc

Hi Pramod,

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 05:04:34PM +0530, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
>
> This patch does below:
> - Removes kfree done on data allocated with devm_zalloc in probe
> path of the driver.
> - Adds a check on return value from devm_kzalloc which was missing
>
> CC: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
> CC: Lejun Zhu <[email protected]>
> CC: Sachin Kamat <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 17 +++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> index 5a6334b..fc64ec6 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> @@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
> sizeof(*gpio_keys_pdata) +
> sizeof(*gpio_keys) * MAX_NBUTTONS,
> GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!gpio_keys_pdata)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

OK, that makes sense.

> +
> gpio_keys = (void *)(gpio_keys_pdata + 1);
>
> for (info = button_info; info->name; info++) {
> @@ -102,20 +105,16 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
> n_buttons++;
> }
>
> - if (n_buttons == 0) {
> - error = -ENODEV;
> - goto err_free_mem;
> - }
> + if (n_buttons == 0)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);

But that one and the rest don't, because failure in
soc_button_device_create() does not necessarily mean that binding for
the whole device will fail. In this case we do not want unused memory
hang around.

Thanks.

--
Dmitry

2014-07-28 06:50:44

by Pramod Gurav

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: soc_button_array: Remove kfree on data allocated with devm_zalloc

Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for the review.

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Pramod,
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 05:04:34PM +0530, [email protected] wrote:
>> From: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
>>
>> This patch does below:
>> - Removes kfree done on data allocated with devm_zalloc in probe
>> path of the driver.
>> - Adds a check on return value from devm_kzalloc which was missing
>>
>> CC: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
>> CC: Lejun Zhu <[email protected]>
>> CC: Sachin Kamat <[email protected]>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 17 +++++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>> index 5a6334b..fc64ec6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>> @@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
>> sizeof(*gpio_keys_pdata) +
>> sizeof(*gpio_keys) * MAX_NBUTTONS,
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!gpio_keys_pdata)
>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> OK, that makes sense.
>
>> +
>> gpio_keys = (void *)(gpio_keys_pdata + 1);
>>
>> for (info = button_info; info->name; info++) {
>> @@ -102,20 +105,16 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
>> n_buttons++;
>> }
>>
>> - if (n_buttons == 0) {
>> - error = -ENODEV;
>> - goto err_free_mem;
>> - }
>> + if (n_buttons == 0)
>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>
> But that one and the rest don't, because failure in
> soc_button_device_create() does not necessarily mean that binding for
> the whole device will fail. In this case we do not want unused memory
> hang around.
Agree. Should resend the patch with only the error check after mem
allocation and will be little more careful while sending any such
change. :)

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dmitry



--
Thanks and Regards
Pramod

2014-07-28 07:10:22

by Dmitry Torokhov

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: soc_button_array: Remove kfree on data allocated with devm_zalloc

On July 27, 2014 11:50:41 PM PDT, pramod gurav <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi Dmitry,
>
>Thanks for the review.
>
>On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Pramod,
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 05:04:34PM +0530, [email protected]
>wrote:
>>> From: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> This patch does below:
>>> - Removes kfree done on data allocated with devm_zalloc in probe
>>> path of the driver.
>>> - Adds a check on return value from devm_kzalloc which was missing
>>>
>>> CC: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
>>> CC: Lejun Zhu <[email protected]>
>>> CC: Sachin Kamat <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 17 +++++++----------
>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>>> index 5a6334b..fc64ec6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
>>> @@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
>>> sizeof(*gpio_keys_pdata) +
>>> sizeof(*gpio_keys) *
>MAX_NBUTTONS,
>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!gpio_keys_pdata)
>>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>
>> OK, that makes sense.
>>
>>> +
>>> gpio_keys = (void *)(gpio_keys_pdata + 1);
>>>
>>> for (info = button_info; info->name; info++) {
>>> @@ -102,20 +105,16 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct pnp_dev *pdev,
>>> n_buttons++;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (n_buttons == 0) {
>>> - error = -ENODEV;
>>> - goto err_free_mem;
>>> - }
>>> + if (n_buttons == 0)
>>> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>>
>> But that one and the rest don't, because failure in
>> soc_button_device_create() does not necessarily mean that binding for
>> the whole device will fail. In this case we do not want unused memory
>> hang around.
>Agree. Should resend the patch with only the error check after mem
>allocation and will be little more careful while sending any such
>change. :)

No need to resend, I picked out the good bits and applied.


Thanks.

--
Dmitry

2014-07-28 07:24:24

by Pramod Gurav

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: soc_button_array: Remove kfree on data allocated with devm_zalloc

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On July 27, 2014 11:50:41 PM PDT, pramod gurav <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Hi Dmitry,
>>

>
> No need to resend, I picked out the good bits and applied.
Thanks. :)


--
Thanks and Regards
Pramod