From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753373AbbDBO45 (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:56:57 -0400 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143]:65275 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751751AbbDBO4x (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:56:53 -0400 Message-ID: <551D58B2.2050302@nod.at> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:56:50 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fabio Estevam CC: Brian Norris , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , David Woodhouse , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: Add simple read disturb test References: <1427984026-31100-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <551D5352.8060305@nod.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 02.04.2015 um 16:45 schrieb Fabio Estevam: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Why? Free()ing a NULL pointer is perfectly fine. >> What did I miss? :) > > If the first 'iobuf = kmalloc(mtd->erasesize, GFP_KERNEL);' fails then > you jump to the out label where you call 5 kfree() and then return the > error. > > It would be much better just to return the error immediately in this > case and add one label for each allocation error, so that it only > kfree the previous successful allocations. It is not *much* better. It is just a matter of taste. Thanks, //richard From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143] helo=radon.swed.at) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YdgYU-0007wM-JH for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 14:57:15 +0000 Message-ID: <551D58B2.2050302@nod.at> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:56:50 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fabio Estevam Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: Add simple read disturb test References: <1427984026-31100-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <551D5352.8060305@nod.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , linux-kernel List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Am 02.04.2015 um 16:45 schrieb Fabio Estevam: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Why? Free()ing a NULL pointer is perfectly fine. >> What did I miss? :) > > If the first 'iobuf = kmalloc(mtd->erasesize, GFP_KERNEL);' fails then > you jump to the out label where you call 5 kfree() and then return the > error. > > It would be much better just to return the error immediately in this > case and add one label for each allocation error, so that it only > kfree the previous successful allocations. It is not *much* better. It is just a matter of taste. Thanks, //richard