From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: boris.brezillon@bootlin.com (Boris Brezillon) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 22:50:09 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller In-Reply-To: <1539839345-14021-3-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> References: <1539839345-14021-1-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <1539839345-14021-3-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> Message-ID: <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:09:05 +0800 Jianxin Pan wrote: > +static int meson_nfc_buffer_init(struct mtd_info *mtd) > +{ > + struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd); > + struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand); > + static int max_page_bytes, max_info_bytes; > + int page_bytes, info_bytes; > + int nsectors; > + > + nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size; > + page_bytes = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize; > + info_bytes = nsectors * PER_INFO_BYTE; > + > + if (nfc->data_buf && nfc->info_buf) { > + if (max_page_bytes < page_bytes) > + meson_nfc_free_buffer(nfc); > + else > + return 0; > + } > + > + max_page_bytes = max_t(int, max_page_bytes, page_bytes); > + max_info_bytes = max_t(int, max_info_bytes, info_bytes); > + > + nfc->data_buf = kmalloc(max_page_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); Is there a good reason for not using chip->data_buf and allocating a new buffer here? > + if (!nfc->data_buf) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + nfc->info_buf = kmalloc(max_info_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!nfc->info_buf) { > + kfree(nfc->data_buf); > + return -ENOMEM; > + } I'd recommend moving this info_buf in the priv chip struct, otherwise you'll have to protect nfc->info_buf with a lock to prevent an already register chip from using this pointer while you're reallocating the buffer. Also, I think you have a memleak here. > + > + return 0; > +}