Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753815AbdHXUzs (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 16:55:48 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:44410 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753314AbdHXUzr (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 16:55:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 23:55:10 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/microcode: Silence a static checker warning Message-ID: <20170824205510.zy574qloxb4tsokq@mwanda> References: <20170822211335.r7wcfcisdlq2xwgz@pd.tnic> <20170824201557.ev4ebslf6sg6xmne@mwanda> <20170824204714.jedeaphwmou5qafd@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170824204714.jedeaphwmou5qafd@pd.tnic> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1791 Lines: 57 On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:47:14PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > index 59edbe9d4ccb..0179f0fd8a79 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c > @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ static bool microcode_matches(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header, > return false; > } > > -static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size) > +static struct ucode_patch *memdup_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > { > struct ucode_patch *p; > > @@ -183,11 +183,13 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > if (mc_hdr->rev <= mc_saved_hdr->rev) > continue; > > - p = __alloc_microcode_buf(data, size); > - if (IS_ERR(p)) > + p = memdup_patch(data, size); > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { > pr_err("Error allocating buffer %p\n", data); > - else > - list_replace(&iter->plist, &p->plist); > + continue; > + } > + > + list_replace(&iter->plist, &p->plist); > } > } > This is just cleanups and doesn't change the behavior. > @@ -196,11 +198,12 @@ static void save_microcode_patch(void *data, unsigned int size) > * newly found. > */ > if (!prev_found) { > - p = __alloc_microcode_buf(data, size); > - if (IS_ERR(p)) > + p = memdup_patch(data, size); > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { > pr_err("Error allocating buffer for %p\n", data); > - else > - list_add_tail(&p->plist, µcode_cache); > + return; > + } > + list_add_tail(&p->plist, µcode_cache); > } The static checker is still going to complain about the error pointer from the loop. Perhaps we should only set prev_found if the memdup_patch() inside the loop succeeds? regards, dan carpenter