Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 28 Dec 2022 18:38:48 +0530
From:   Deepak R Varma <drv@mailo.com>
To:     Mikko Perttunen <cyndis@kapsi.fi>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@microsoft.com>,
        Praveen Kumar <kumarpraveen@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Deepak R Varma <drv@mailo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/tegra: submit: No need for Null pointer check before
 kfree
Message-ID: <Y6w/4IzoMFsVnCmu@qemulion>
References: <Y6sn7XptKyk5cbrA@qemulion>
 <864f2fdd-4289-a178-bbf1-c2a6a579c58c@kapsi.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <864f2fdd-4289-a178-bbf1-c2a6a579c58c@kapsi.fi>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 02:28:54PM +0200, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> On 12/27/22 19:14, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > kfree() & vfree() internally perform NULL check on the pointer handed
> > to it and take no action if it indeed is NULL. Hence there is no need
> > for a pre-check of the memory pointer before handing it to
> > kfree()/vfree().
> >
> > Issue reported by ifnullfree.cocci Coccinelle semantic patch script.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <drv@mailo.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/submit.c | 4 ++--
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/submit.c
> > index 066f88564169..06f836db99d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/submit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/submit.c
> > @@ -680,8 +680,8 @@ int tegra_drm_ioctl_channel_submit(struct drm_device *drm, void *data,
> >   		kfree(job_data->used_mappings);
> >   	}
> >
> > -	if (job_data)
> > -		kfree(job_data);
> > +	kfree(job_data);
> > +
> >   put_bo:
> >   	gather_bo_put(&bo->base);
> >   unlock:
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
> >
> >
>
> It continues to be the case that I think this transform is bad. Same applies
> to the host1x patch.

Hello Mikko,
Thank you for responding to the patch proposal. Could you please explain why is
this bad?

Regards,
./drv

>
> Mikko