Re: lib/argv_split.c : should argv be kfree'ed ?

["Toralf Förster" <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>]

On 06/29/2014 12:04 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:52:37PM +0200, Toralf Förster wrote:
>> /me wonders if this patch is needed here :
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/argv_split.c b/lib/argv_split.c
>> index e927ed0..7de4cb4 100644
>> --- a/lib/argv_split.c
>> +++ b/lib/argv_split.c
>> @@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ char **argv_split(gfp_t gfp, const char *str, int *argcp)
>>                         *argv++ = argv_str;
>>                 }
>>         }
>> +       kfree (argv);
>>         *argv = NULL;
>>
>>         if (argcp)
>>
> 
> No, see argv_free.
> 
Ah, understood, it is in the responsibility of the caller to avoid the memleak.
BTW may I ask you about your opinion about this warning of cppcheck in lib/flex_array.c:

        for (part_nr = start_part; part_nr <= end_part; part_nr++) {<--- Memory leak: part
                part = __fa_get_part(fa, part_nr, flags);
                if (!part)
                        return -ENOMEM;
        }
        return 0;

-- 
Toralf