Re: [PATCH 0/2] net/smc: Adjustments for two function implementations

[Wen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 2023/12/31 22:55, Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2023 15:48:45 +0100
> 
> A few update suggestions were taken into account
> from static source code analysis.
> 
> Markus Elfring (2):
>    Return directly after a failed kzalloc() in smc_fill_gid_list()
>    Improve exception handling in smc_llc_cli_add_link_invite()
> 
>   net/smc/af_smc.c  |  2 +-
>   net/smc/smc_llc.c | 15 +++++++--------
>   2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.43.0

Hi Markus. I see you want to fix the kfree(NULL) issues in these two patches.

But I am wondering if this is necessary, since kfree() can handle NULL correctly.

/**
  * kfree - free previously allocated memory
  * @object: pointer returned by kmalloc() or kmem_cache_alloc()
  *
  * If @object is NULL, no operation is performed.
  */
void kfree(const void *object)
{
         struct folio *folio;
         struct slab *slab;
         struct kmem_cache *s;

         trace_kfree(_RET_IP_, object);

         if (unlikely(ZERO_OR_NULL_PTR(object)))
                 return;

         folio = virt_to_folio(object);
         if (unlikely(!folio_test_slab(folio))) {
                 free_large_kmalloc(folio, (void *)object);
                 return;
         }

         slab = folio_slab(folio);
         s = slab->slab_cache;
         __kmem_cache_free(s, (void *)object, _RET_IP_);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(kfree);


Thanks,
Wen Gu