Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   linmiaohe <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
CC:     "liran.alon@oracle.com" <liran.alon@oracle.com>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        "sean.j.christopherson@intel.com" <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        "wanpengli@tencent.com" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        "jmattson@google.com" <jmattson@google.com>,
        "joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>, "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Fix potential memory leak in svm_cpu_init()
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Fix potential memory leak in svm_cpu_init()
Thread-Index: AdXB22PCGgAmhN24HEq8r6drwzC6/g==
Date:   Fri, 3 Jan 2020 02:19:33 +0000
Message-ID: <9083833afd7c465a9222e6801cb66499@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Vitaly writes:
>> From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
>>  	if (svm_sev_enabled()) {
>>  		r = -ENOMEM;
>
>Not your fault but this assignment to 'r' seem to be redundant: it is already set to '-ENOMEM' above, but this is also not perfect as ... 
>
>> @@ -1020,14 +1020,16 @@ static int svm_cpu_init(int cpu)
>>  					      sizeof(void *),
>>  	return r;
>
>... '-ENOMEM' is actually the only possible outcome here. In case you'll be re-submitting, I'd suggest we drop 'r' entirely and just reture -ENOMEM here.

The var r is really unnecessary and we should clean it up. Thanks for your good suggest. I would send a patch v2 soon.

>
>Anyways, your patch seems to be correct, so:
>
>Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>

Thanks for your review.