Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: qKLvXPzNERWBf1sJYJFKIoxPpHwWWhK2KqeG+GDfS5ma8jrjOK8jHdWbxyPHLu7Iui0cKRJW03
 /v+0mxgX4/zQ==
IronPort-SDR: KN74coCIjSJQJohpAoATfBJRz1D5s39ayV45mr7VDhXTMgjcNrAmW2NhN0GSFFsKeMr8Pp3dRd
 kvs8VKtCwqwQ==
Date:   Mon, 18 Jan 2021 17:32:18 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI: scan: Rearrange memory allocation in
 acpi_device_add()
Message-ID: <20210118153218.GX4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <3494203.VBaj39JGmp@kreacher>
 <2999734.9HhbEeWEHR@kreacher>
 <8218eff4-6629-ac20-ec3f-a66aad445bb6@redhat.com>
 <CAJZ5v0hv2FX2wtuwu9Jd1zZiGut9kUzQvCH5vXLMyFpqvvYOkA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0hv2FX2wtuwu9Jd1zZiGut9kUzQvCH5vXLMyFpqvvYOkA@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 04:16:16PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 1:37 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 1/14/21 7:46 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

...

> > When I have cases like this, where 2 mallocs are necessary I typically do it like this:
> >
> >         const char *bus_id;
> >
> >         ...
> >
> >         } else {
> >                 acpi_device_bus_id = kzalloc(sizeof(*acpi_device_bus_id),
> >                                              GFP_KERNEL);
> >                 bus_id = kstrdup_const(acpi_device_hid(device), GFP_KERNEL);
> >                 if (!acpi_device_bus_id || !bus_id) {
> >                         kfree(acpi_device_bus_id);


> >                         kfree(bus_id);

Just to be sure, shouldn't it be kfree_const() ?

> >                         result = -ENOMEM;
> >                         goto err_unlock;
> >                 }
> >                 acpi_device_bus_id->bus_id = bus_id;
> >                 list_add_tail(&acpi_device_bus_id->node, &acpi_bus_id_list);
> >         }
> >
> >         ...
> >
> > So that there is only one if / 1 error-handling path for both mallocs.
> > I personally find this a bit cleaner.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko