[PATCH V2] mm/cma: cma_declare_contiguous: correct err handling

[PATCH V2] mm/cma: cma_declare_contiguous: correct err handling

[Peng Fan]

In case cma_init_reserved_mem failed, need to free the memblock allocated
by memblock_reserve or memblock_alloc_range.

Quote Catalin's comments:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/26/482
Kmemleak is supposed to work with the memblock_{alloc,free} pair and it
ignores the memblock_reserve() as a memblock_alloc() implementation
detail. It is, however, tolerant to memblock_free() being called on
a sub-range or just a different range from a previous memblock_alloc().
So the original patch looks fine to me. FWIW:

Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
---

V2:
 Per Mike's comments, add more information in commit log
 Add R-B

 mm/cma.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
index c7b39dd3b4f6..f4f3a8a57d86 100644
--- a/mm/cma.c
+++ b/mm/cma.c
@@ -353,12 +353,14 @@ int __init cma_declare_contiguous(phys_addr_t base,
 
 	ret = cma_init_reserved_mem(base, size, order_per_bit, name, res_cma);
 	if (ret)
-		goto err;
+		goto free_mem;
 
 	pr_info("Reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M,
 		&base);
 	return 0;
 
+free_mem:
+	memblock_free(base, size);
 err:
 	pr_err("Failed to reserve %ld MiB\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M);
 	return ret;
-- 
2.16.4

Re: [PATCH V2] mm/cma: cma_declare_contiguous: correct err handling

[Mike Rapoport]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 02:34:55PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> In case cma_init_reserved_mem failed, need to free the memblock allocated
> by memblock_reserve or memblock_alloc_range.
> 
> Quote Catalin's comments:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/26/482
> Kmemleak is supposed to work with the memblock_{alloc,free} pair and it
> ignores the memblock_reserve() as a memblock_alloc() implementation
> detail. It is, however, tolerant to memblock_free() being called on
> a sub-range or just a different range from a previous memblock_alloc().
> So the original patch looks fine to me. FWIW:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>

> ---
> 
> V2:
>  Per Mike's comments, add more information in commit log
>  Add R-B
> 
>  mm/cma.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> index c7b39dd3b4f6..f4f3a8a57d86 100644
> --- a/mm/cma.c
> +++ b/mm/cma.c
> @@ -353,12 +353,14 @@ int __init cma_declare_contiguous(phys_addr_t base,
>  
>  	ret = cma_init_reserved_mem(base, size, order_per_bit, name, res_cma);
>  	if (ret)
> -		goto err;
> +		goto free_mem;
>  
>  	pr_info("Reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M,
>  		&base);
>  	return 0;
>  
> +free_mem:
> +	memblock_free(base, size);
>  err:
>  	pr_err("Failed to reserve %ld MiB\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M);
>  	return ret;
> -- 
> 2.16.4
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.