[PATCH] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: ti-bandgap.c: Cleaning up memory leak

[PATCH] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: ti-bandgap.c: Cleaning up memory leak

[Rickard Strandqvist]

There is a risk for memory leak in when something unexpected happens
and the function returns.

This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.

Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se>
---
 drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
index 3ab12ee..8401d2e 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
@@ -1155,8 +1155,9 @@ static struct ti_bandgap *ti_bandgap_build(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	/* register shadow for context save and restore */
 	bgp->regval = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*bgp->regval) *
 				   bgp->conf->sensor_count, GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!bgp) {
+	if (!bgp->regval) {
 		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unable to allocate mem for driver ref\n");
+		devm_kfree(&pdev->dev, bgp);
 		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
 	}
 
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: [PATCH] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: ti-bandgap.c: Cleaning up memory leak

[Eduardo Valentin]

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 01:33:51PM +0200, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> There is a risk for memory leak in when something unexpected happens
> and the function returns.

I don't think there is a risk of memory leak, but wrong address access,
in this case.

> 
> This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se>
> ---
>  drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c |    3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
> index 3ab12ee..8401d2e 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
> @@ -1155,8 +1155,9 @@ static struct ti_bandgap *ti_bandgap_build(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	/* register shadow for context save and restore */
>  	bgp->regval = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*bgp->regval) *
>  				   bgp->conf->sensor_count, GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!bgp) {
> +	if (!bgp->regval) {

I agree with this fix.

>  		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unable to allocate mem for driver ref\n");
> +		devm_kfree(&pdev->dev, bgp);

But I think this is unnecessary, as it has been managed allocated.

Cheers,

Eduardo

>  		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 1.7.10.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: ti-bandgap.c: Cleaning up memory leak

[Rickard Strandqvist]

Hi

Okay, then I make a new patch with only the if() part of the code.


Best regards
Rickard Strandqvist


2014-06-02 19:08 GMT+02:00 Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 01:33:51PM +0200, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
>> There is a risk for memory leak in when something unexpected happens
>> and the function returns.
>
> I don't think there is a risk of memory leak, but wrong address access,
> in this case.
>
>>
>> This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se>
>> ---
>>  drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c |    3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
>> index 3ab12ee..8401d2e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-bandgap.c
>> @@ -1155,8 +1155,9 @@ static struct ti_bandgap *ti_bandgap_build(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>       /* register shadow for context save and restore */
>>       bgp->regval = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*bgp->regval) *
>>                                  bgp->conf->sensor_count, GFP_KERNEL);
>> -     if (!bgp) {
>> +     if (!bgp->regval) {
>
> I agree with this fix.
>
>>               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unable to allocate mem for driver ref\n");
>> +             devm_kfree(&pdev->dev, bgp);
>
> But I think this is unnecessary, as it has been managed allocated.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Eduardo
>
>>               return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>       }
>>
>> --
>> 1.7.10.4
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html