[U-Boot] [PATCH] drivers/elbc:Memory leak fix
Freeing allocated memory to priv before returning from the function
Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra raghav@freescale.com --- drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c index e85832d..bbf1f39 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static int fsl_elbc_chip_init(int devnum, u8 *addr) if (priv->bank >= MAX_BANKS) { printf("fsl_elbc_nand: address did not match any " "chip selects\n"); + kfree((void *)priv); return -ENODEV; }
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 02:54:58PM +0530, Raghav Dogra wrote:
Freeing allocated memory to priv before returning from the function
Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra raghav@freescale.com
drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c index e85832d..bbf1f39 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static int fsl_elbc_chip_init(int devnum, u8 *addr) if (priv->bank >= MAX_BANKS) { printf("fsl_elbc_nand: address did not match any " "chip selects\n");
kfree((void *)priv);
Cast is unnecessary; I'll remove when applying.
-Scott
-----Original Message----- From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Scott Wood Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 1:57 AM To: Dogra Raghav-B46184 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Sun York-R58495 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] drivers/elbc:Memory leak fix
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 02:54:58PM +0530, Raghav Dogra wrote:
Freeing allocated memory to priv before returning from the function
Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra raghav@freescale.com
drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c index e85832d..bbf1f39 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static int fsl_elbc_chip_init(int devnum, u8 *addr) if (priv->bank >= MAX_BANKS) { printf("fsl_elbc_nand: address did not match any " "chip selects\n");
kfree((void *)priv);Cast is unnecessary; I'll remove when applying.
It is required as kfree declaration need void pointer. It is not getting catch during GCC build. But during static analysis using Klockwork, this is shown as error.
I will suggest to have this patch as it is. It is good practice to pass pointer in the desired format to called function.
--prabhakar
On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 21:55 -0500, Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Scott Wood Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 1:57 AM To: Dogra Raghav-B46184 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Sun York-R58495 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] drivers/elbc:Memory leak fix
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 02:54:58PM +0530, Raghav Dogra wrote:
Freeing allocated memory to priv before returning from the function
Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra raghav@freescale.com
drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c index e85832d..bbf1f39 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static int fsl_elbc_chip_init(int devnum, u8 *addr) if (priv->bank >= MAX_BANKS) { printf("fsl_elbc_nand: address did not match any " "chip selects\n");
kfree((void *)priv);Cast is unnecessary; I'll remove when applying.
It is required as kfree declaration need void pointer.
It is *not* required. Any pointer can be implicitly converted to a void pointer.
It is not getting catch during GCC build. But during static analysis using Klockwork, this is shown as error.
I don't care what Klockwork considers an error. Klockwork does not dictate the project's style guidelines.
I will suggest to have this patch as it is. It is good practice to pass pointer in the desired format to called function.
It is not good practice to cast unnecessarily. Casts bypass the type system and thus should be rare.
-Scott
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Kushwaha Prabhakar prabhakar@freescale.com wrote:
It is not getting catch during GCC build. But during static analysis using Klockwork, this is shown as error.
Then Klockwork is wrong.
participants (4)
-
Kushwaha Prabhakar -
Raghav Dogra -
Scott Wood -
Timur Tabi