From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Abhinav Jain <jain.abhinav177@gmail.com>
Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, gpiccoli@igalia.com,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
skhan@linuxfoundation.org, javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pstore/ram: Replace of_node_put with __free() for automatic cleanup
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 16:41:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202404241639.3F455ECCD@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240415161409.8375-1-jain.abhinav177@gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 04:14:09PM +0000, Abhinav Jain wrote:
> Add __free(device_node) to the parent_node struct declaration.
> Move declaration to initialization for ensuring scope sanity.
> Remove of_node_put from parent_node struct.
>
> Suggested-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
> Signed-off-by: Abhinav Jain <jain.abhinav177@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> index b1a455f42e93..14f2f4864e48 100644
> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> @@ -644,7 +644,6 @@ static int ramoops_parse_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct ramoops_platform_data *pdata)
> {
> struct device_node *of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> - struct device_node *parent_node;
> struct resource *res;
> u32 value;
> int ret;
> @@ -704,14 +703,13 @@ static int ramoops_parse_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
> * we're not a child of "reserved-memory" and mimicking the
> * expected behavior.
> */
> - parent_node = of_get_parent(of_node);
> + struct device_node *parent_node __free(device_node) = of_node_parent(of_node);
Please don't move variable definitions into the middle of the function
body. :)
> if (!of_node_name_eq(parent_node, "reserved-memory") &&
> !pdata->console_size && !pdata->ftrace_size &&
> !pdata->pmsg_size && !pdata->ecc_info.ecc_size) {
> pdata->console_size = pdata->record_size;
> pdata->pmsg_size = pdata->record_size;
> }
> - of_node_put(parent_node);
So this change is functionally fine, but there's really no good reason
to do this -- there is no fancy error handling here, so there's no
benefit to making this change. It doesn't really help readability.
-Kees
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-24 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-15 16:14 [PATCH] pstore/ram: Replace of_node_put with __free() for automatic cleanup Abhinav Jain
2024-04-24 23:41 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2024-04-25 5:50 ` Julia Lawall
2024-06-05 22:10 ` Abhinav Jain
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202404241639.3F455ECCD@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=gpiccoli@igalia.com \
--cc=jain.abhinav177@gmail.com \
--cc=javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox