From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 826E245964; Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:46:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="OU8lD5Yc" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A88AC433C8; Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:46:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1703692005; bh=FVAzF6daxQ8ZuqevGdpKsQkUqo5vlGmUhgShjqY2IPU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OU8lD5YcV1tfKJkMESk+txqJXvn3t/8JgQEc7mTFFs3PJBN4Fb8bk0tfsP7J69YST 66B0F0SU7qZYkASqGaSeQWALbSlKEZn2U8NWrPF37lF8NiFMXYpsGV+rW4qQrxcicV eUbzg6CG4usuT6OujzN7Pc/RFHtb16rnr2FSe3Rw= Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:46:41 +0000 From: Greg KH To: Markus Elfring Cc: Hou Tao , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Benjamin Tissoires , David Vernet , Jiri Kosina , LKML , cocci@inria.fr Subject: Re: HID: bpf: One function call less in call_hid_bpf_rdesc_fixup() after error detection Message-ID: <2023122719-stunt-duration-9504@gregkh> References: <3203eb44-6e69-4bda-b585-426408cb75ee@web.de> <618f886f-b2ff-4d50-cf74-e8478a7e8547@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-input@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 09:19:27AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> The kfree() function was called in one case by the > >> call_hid_bpf_rdesc_fixup() function during error handling > >> even if the passed data structure member contained a null pointer. > >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > > > It is totally OK to free a null pointer through kfree() and the ENOMEM > > case is an unlikely case, so I don't think the patch is necessary. > > Would you ever like to avoid redundant data processing a bit more? Hi, This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing list. I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore. Please do not bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time. Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to follow it at all. The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and inability to adapt to feedback. Please feel free to also ignore emails from them. thanks, greg k-h's patch email bot