Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Aug 2023 18:33:07 +0100 | From | Marc Zyngier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] irqdomain: Refactor error path in __irq_domain_alloc_fwnode() |
| |
On 2023-08-04 17:49, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > First of all, there is no need to call kasprintf() if the previous > allocation failed. Second, there is no need to call for kfree() > when we know that its parameter is NULL. Refactor the code accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > --- > kernel/irq/irqdomain.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c > index 0bdef4fe925b..d2bbba46c808 100644 > --- a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c > +++ b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c > @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ struct fwnode_handle > *__irq_domain_alloc_fwnode(unsigned int type, int id, > char *n; > > fwid = kzalloc(sizeof(*fwid), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!fwid) > + return NULL; > > switch (type) { > case IRQCHIP_FWNODE_NAMED: > @@ -93,10 +95,8 @@ struct fwnode_handle > *__irq_domain_alloc_fwnode(unsigned int type, int id, > n = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "irqchip@%pa", pa); > break; > } > - > - if (!fwid || !n) { > + if (!n) { > kfree(fwid); > - kfree(n); > return NULL; > }
What are you trying to fix?
We have a common error handling path, which makes it easy to track the memory management. I don't think this sort of bike shedding adds much to the maintainability of this code.
Now if you have spotted an actual bug, I'm all ears.
M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
| |