From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 15:43:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 1/1] kprobes: Deletion of an unnecessary check before the function call "module_p
Message-Id: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1411161639310.2364@hadrien>
List-Id: <kernel-janitors.vger.kernel.org>
References: <5307CAA2.8060406@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402212321410.2043@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <530A086E.8010901@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402231635510.1985@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <530A72AA.3000601@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402240658210.2090@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <530B5FB6.6010207@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402241710370.2074@hadrien>
 <530C5E18.1020800@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251014170.2080@hadrien>
 <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251840450.7035@hadrien>
 <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402252117150.2047@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402262129250.2221@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <546899CF.8020808@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1411161428190.2364@hadrien>
 <5468B3FD.20409@users.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <5468B3FD.20409@users.sourceforge.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >> index 3995f54..f1e7d45 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >> @@ -1527,8 +1527,7 @@ int register_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)
> >>  out:
> >>  	mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
> >>
> >> -	if (probed_mod)
> >> -		module_put(probed_mod);
> >> +	module_put(probed_mod);
> >
> > There is an out label, so please check whether the labels could not be
> > better positioned to avoid calling module_put when it is not needed.
>
> I do not see refactoring opportunities around jump labels in this use case
> for the implementation of the register_kprobe() function so far because
> the mutex_unlock() function must be called.
> Would you like to suggest any other source code fine-tuning?

OK.  I don't think that removing the if is a good choice in this case.
The code ret = check_kprobe_address_safe(p, &probed_mod); is unusual, in
that it can fail to do anything in two ways.  One is by setting ret, on
detecting an error, and the other is by returning 0 but still putting a
NULL value in probed_mod when there is nothing to do.  Thus, in the
successful execution of the rest of the function, a probed module might or
might not exist.  The if around the module_put is helpful to the reader to
understand that this possibility exists.

julia