From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753609Ab3FBKVc (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jun 2013 06:21:32 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:60208 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752976Ab3FBKVZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jun 2013 06:21:25 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 12:21:37 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Thomas Meyer Cc: herrmann.der.user@googlemail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, amd64-microcode@amd64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, microcode, AMD: Cocci spatch "memdup.spatch" Message-ID: <20130602102137.GA3441@nazgul.tnic> References: <1370079731.29224.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1370079731.29224.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 11:42:11AM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Meyer > --- > > diff -u -p a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_amd.c > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_amd.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_amd.c > @@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ static int verify_and_add_patch(unsigned > return -EINVAL; > } > > - patch->data = kzalloc(patch_size, GFP_KERNEL); > + patch->data = kmemdup(fw + SECTION_HDR_SIZE, patch_size, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!patch->data) { > pr_err("Patch data allocation failure.\n"); > kfree(patch); > @@ -353,7 +353,6 @@ static int verify_and_add_patch(unsigned > } > > /* All looks ok, copy patch... */ > - memcpy(patch->data, fw + SECTION_HDR_SIZE, patch_size); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&patch->plist); > patch->patch_id = mc_hdr->patch_id; > patch->equiv_cpu = proc_id; I can see what happens with a little code browsing of the definition of kmemdup but patches without a commit message are most times not a very elegant thing. So please add a nice commit message explaining why you're doing what you're doing. If the coccinelle script is not in the kernel tree, then referring to it doesn't mean a whole lot so don't do it. Rather, explaining why you're doing the change, is a much better thing to do. Thanks.