On Wed, 2025-12-03 at 09:45 +0100, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > On 12/3/25 09:09, ally heev wrote: > > On Tue, 2025-12-02 at 10:17 -0800, Tony Nguyen wrote: > > > > > > On 12/2/2025 11:47 AM, ally heev wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2025-12-01 at 13:40 -0800, Tony Nguyen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 11/23/2025 11:40 PM, Ally Heev wrote: > > > > > > Uninitialized pointers with `__free` attribute can cause undefined > > > > > > behavior as the memory assigned randomly to the pointer is freed > > > > > > automatically when the pointer goes out of scope. > > > > > > > > > > > > We could just fix it by initializing the pointer to NULL, but, as > > > > > > usage of > > > > > > cleanup attributes is discouraged in net [1], trying to achieve > > > > > > cleanup > > > > > > using goto > > > > > > > > > > These two drivers already have multiple other usages of this. All the > > > > > other instances initialize to NULL; I'd prefer to see this do the same > > > > > over changing this single instance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Other usages are slightly complicated to be refactored and might need > > > > good testing. Do you want me to do it in a different series? > > > > > > Hi Ally, > > > > > > Sorry, I think I was unclear. I'd prefer these two initialized to NULL, > > > to match the other usages, over removing the __free() from them. > > > > I had a patch for that already, but, isn't using __free discouraged in > > networking drivers [1]? Simon was against it [2] > > you see, the construct is discouraged, so we don't use it everywhere, > but cleaning up just a little would not change the state of the matter > (IOW we will still be in "driver has some __free() usage" state). >
But still we can just fix the uninitialized ones the right way [1] right? since we have to fix them anyway. There already a patch [2] for that [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wicotw5ufturanvjkr6769d29tf7of79gujdqhs_tk...@mail.gmail.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251106-aheev-uninitialized-free-attr-net-ethernet-v3-1-ef2220f4f...@gmail.com/ > TBH, I would not spent my time "undoing" all of the __free() that we > have already, especially the testing part sounds not fun. +1 > > Turning all usage points to "= NULL" is orthogonal, and would be great. > > > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > > [1] > > https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html#using-device-managed-and-cleanup-h-constructs > > > > Regards, > > Ally > >
