Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:55:31 +0100 | From | Frank Seidel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add MMC Password Protection (lock/unlock) support V8: mmc_key_retention.diff |
| |
Quoting Anderson Briglia <anderson.briglia@indt.org.br>: > [...] Hi, thats really cool stuff you're providing with your patches. :) I have some feedback or questions some parts here. But as i just started trying to get into kernelhacking you probably better don't take my notes to serious, please.
> Index: linux-linus-2.6/drivers/mmc/mmc_sysfs.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-linus-2.6.orig/drivers/mmc/mmc_sysfs.c 2006-12-04 [...] > +static int mmc_key_instantiate(struct key *key, const void *data, > size_t datalen) > +{ > + struct mmc_key_payload *mpayload, *zap; > + int ret; > + > + zap = NULL; What is zap here for? future use? And wouldn't it be good to also initialize mplayload here?
> + ret = -EINVAL; Is there a special reason why you already assign the errors to the return value variable before its clear that the assignment is needed?
> + if (datalen <= 0 || datalen > MMC_KEYLEN_MAXBYTES || !data) { Isn't the last "|| !data" redundant as you already tested if datalen ==0?
> + pr_debug("Invalid data\n"); > + goto error; > + } > + > + ret = key_payload_reserve(key, datalen); > + if (ret < 0) { > + pr_debug("ret = %d\n", ret); > + goto error; > + } > + > + ret = -ENOMEM; Same as above: Why do you in any case want to assign it here?
> + mpayload = kmalloc(sizeof(*mpayload) + datalen, GFP_KERNEL); I may be totally wrong, but is dereferencing a not initialized pointer (even just for using sizeof) really ok? Wouldn't it be safer to use a sizeof(struct mmc_key_payload) here?
Thanks, Frank
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |