[PATCHv2] Fixes return logic of function of pch_gbe_alloc_tx_buffers() Report if it breaks anything related to this driver.
From: Nick
Date: Sun Jun 15 2014 - 16:16:14 EST
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
index 704cf63..7d5efd7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
@@ -1500,7 +1500,7 @@ pch_gbe_alloc_rx_buffers_pool(struct
pch_gbe_adapter *adapter,
* @adapter: Board private structure
* @tx_ring: Tx descriptor ring
*/
-static void pch_gbe_alloc_tx_buffers(struct pch_gbe_adapter *adapter,
+static int pch_gbe_alloc_tx_buffers(struct pch_gbe_adapter *adapter
struct pch_gbe_tx_ring *tx_ring)
{
struct pch_gbe_buffer *buffer_info;
@@ -1516,13 +1516,13 @@ static void pch_gbe_alloc_tx_buffers(struct
pch_gbe_adapter *adapter,
buffer_info = &tx_ring->buffer_info[i];
skb = netdev_alloc_skb(adapter->netdev, bufsz);
if(!skb)
+ return -ENOMEM;
skb_reserve(skb, PCH_GBE_DMA_ALIGN);
buffer_info->skb = skb;
tx_desc = PCH_GBE_TX_DESC(*tx_ring, i);
tx_desc->gbec_status = (DSC_INIT16);
}
- return;
+ return 0;
}
/**
--
1.9.1
Thanks for the Comments,
Nick
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:53 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Nick <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 00:05:39 -0400
>
>> Signed-off-by: Nick <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
>> index 73e6683..704cf63 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/oki-semi/pch_gbe/pch_gbe_main.c
>> @@ -1515,6 +1515,8 @@ static void pch_gbe_alloc_tx_buffers(struct pch_gbe_adapter *adapter,
>> for (i = 0; i < tx_ring->count; i++) {
>> buffer_info = &tx_ring->buffer_info[i];
>> skb = netdev_alloc_skb(adapter->netdev, bufsz);
>> + if (!skb)
>> + return NULL;
>
> You didn't even compile test this.
>
> The function has a void return type, you can't return NULL.
>
> Furthermore, you have to adjust things so that the caller knows that
> this operation failed, because the device cannot be brought up
> successfully unless all the TX buffer slots get allocated properly.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/