Kunwu Chan <chentao@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Hi Christophe,
Thanks for your reply.
It's my bad. According your reply, i read the code in
sysfs_do_create_link_sd.There is a null pointer check indeed.
My intention was to check null pointer after memory allocation.
Whether we can add a comment here for someone like me, the null pointer
check is no need here?
I don't mind there being a NULL check for name.
But the code shouldn't silently return if name can't be allocated.
Notice that if we can't create the cache we *panic*. A failure to
allocate name, which causes us to skip the cache creation, needs to also
panic.
cheers
On 2023/11/24 23:17, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 22/11/2023 à 10:00, Kunwu Chan a écrit :
[Vous ne recevez pas souvent de courriers de chentao@xxxxxxxxxx. Découvrez pourquoi ceci est important à https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
kasprintf() returns a pointer to dynamically allocated memory
which can be NULL upon failure. Ensure the allocation was successful
by checking the pointer validity.
Are you sure this is needed ? Did you check what happens what name is NULL ?
If I followed stuff correctly, I end up in function
sysfs_do_create_link_sd() which already handles the NULL name case which
a big hammer warning.
Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/powerpc/mm/init-common.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/init-common.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/init-common.c
index 119ef491f797..0884fc601c46 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/mm/init-common.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/init-common.c
@@ -139,6 +139,8 @@ void pgtable_cache_add(unsigned int shift)
align = max_t(unsigned long, align, minalign);
name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "pgtable-2^%d", shift);
+ if (!name)
+ return;
new = kmem_cache_create(name, table_size, align, 0, ctor(shift));
if (!new)
panic("Could not allocate pgtable cache for order %d", shift);
--
2.34.1