On Tue, 7 Apr 2015, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 03:40:17PM +0300, Giedrius Statkevičius wrote: > > If one of the allocations of memory for storing a channel information struct > > fails then free all the successful allocations and return -ENOMEM that gets > > propogated to the pci layer. Also, remove a bogus skipping in the next > > part of > > the initiation if a previous memory allocation failed because we won't > > execute > > that if any of the allocations failed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Giedrius Statkevičius <[email protected]> > > --- > > v2: Only returning -ENOMEM if an allocation failed isn't enough as it was > > spotted by Sudip so create a new label that frees all successfully allocated > > stuff and only then returns -ENOMEM. Also, remove a unnecessary check in the > > next loop. > > > > drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c | 11 +++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c > > b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c > > index ce4187f..60d7e49 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_tty.c > > @@ -316,6 +316,8 @@ int dgnc_tty_init(struct dgnc_board *brd) > > * interrupt context, and there are no locks held. > > */ > > brd->channels[i] = kzalloc(sizeof(*brd->channels[i]), > > GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!brd->channels[i]) > > + goto err_free_channels; > > The comments here say that sometimes brd->channels[] are allocated > earlier. If that's true then the error handling is not correct. But > I don't think it is true... Could you investigate and delete the > comments and unnecessary "if (!brd->channels[i])" NULL check. > > regards, > dan carpenter >
I've checked this earlier and now looked over again and I didn't find any other place where this is allocated. My thought was that deleting that comment and that check could be too much for one patch. I'll send a v3. Su pagarba / Regards, Giedrius
