Hi Heinrich,
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 at 23:13, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
Am 29. Oktober 2024 16:45:29 MEZ schrieb Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org:
Hi Ilias,
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 at 11:02, Ilias Apalodimas ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Simon,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 at 14:48, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Freeing a NULL pointer is an error in EFI, so check the pointer first, before freeing it.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c index a3aa2b8d1b9..431a38704e9 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c @@ -1180,7 +1180,8 @@ out: free(opt[i].lo); } free(opt);
efi_free_pool(handles);
if (handles)efi_free_pool(handles);We don't need this, efi_free_pool() checks the pointer already.
Yes, but it then returns an error (EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER), which gets logged, with this series.
So this is not a problem of the existing code but of your patch series which creates a superfluous log message.
Is it an error to free a zero pointer in EFI?
Regards, Simon