Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-89737-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2024 12:46:24 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Jonathan Cameron
 <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Kees Cook
 <keescook@chromium.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
 netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen
 <lars@metafoo.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@google.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni
 <pabeni@redhat.com>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] iio: core: NULLify private pointer when there is
 no private data
Message-ID: <20240303124624.08740a2d@jic23-huawei>
In-Reply-To: <Zd-na3oVV4Chl4Ft@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240228204919.3680786-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
	<20240228204919.3680786-4-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
	<CAMknhBFbQ2BmGd18wC0odO-b_bWvJEO3FCYEtpvhB1fF+MEFgg@mail.gmail.com>
	<Zd-na3oVV4Chl4Ft@smile.fi.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:36:43 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:06:42PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 2:50=E2=80=AFPM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: =20
>=20
> ...
>=20
> > > -       indio_dev->priv =3D (char *)iio_dev_opaque +
> > > -               ALIGN(sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque), IIO_DMA_MINALIGN=
);
> > > +
> > > +       if (sizeof_priv)
> > > +               indio_dev->priv =3D (char *)iio_dev_opaque +
> > > +                       ALIGN(sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque), IIO_DMA_=
MINALIGN);
> > > +       else
> > > +               indio_dev->priv =3D NULL; =20
> >=20
> > Do we actually need the else branch here since we use kzalloc() and
> > therefore indio_dev->priv should already be NULL? =20
>=20
> This is more robust, but I'm okay to drop this. Up to Jonathan.
>=20

Given the allocation is just above here fine to drop the else in this
I think.