Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
Date:   Sat, 18 Nov 2023 20:22:07 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Louis Peens <louis.peens@corigine.com>
Cc:     Denis Arefev <arefev@swemel.ru>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, oss-drivers@corigine.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        lvc-project@linuxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfp: flower: Added pointer check and continue.
Message-ID: <20231118202207.16a60834@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZVd4RYURdHLL+F2h@LouisNoVo>
References: <20231117125701.58927-1-arefev@swemel.ru>
        <ZVd4RYURdHLL+F2h@LouisNoVo>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 16:27:17 +0200 Louis Peens wrote:
> >                 acti_netdevs = kmalloc_array(entry->slave_cnt,
> >                                              sizeof(*acti_netdevs), GFP_KERNEL);
> > 

Unnecessary new line, please remove it.
There should be no empty lines between call and error check.

> > +               if (!acti_netdevs) {
> > +                       schedule_delayed_work(&lag->work, NFP_FL_LAG_DELAY);
> > +                       continue;
> > +               }
> > +  
> Thanks for reporting this Denis, it definitely seems to be an oversight.
> Would you mind adding a 'nfp_flower_cmsg_warn' here as well, so that
> this case does not go undetected? Maybe something like "cannot
> allocate memory for group processing" can work.

There's a checkpatch check against printing warnings on allocation
failures. Kernel will complain loudly on OOM, anyway, there's no need
for a local print.
-- 
pw-bot: cr