[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3] x86/xen: Add some null pointer checking to smp.c
- To: Kunwu Chan <chentao@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jürgen Groß <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx
- From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:45:11 +0100
- Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx>, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Sat, 20 Jan 2024 14:46:11 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Ui-outboundreport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:dNssvMK/v/k=;q8XQawuUKS31N/PKm5AGzjbYetO 99hHwMBOmOWBnCIy1bqPUwVm8VmZgCs81618fDliO0XeeIbovun5R5Ivg2XLiN4bQ13ywhuru z8DGl7M0acIsPBeBndYtQ8El6P3tpZba7uhfEb42sgsXLaHFRMbyGIKR9/9ZrYy822bGxxUz2 iD5aPXV2tlaCJd+ilskTN6s1abEhXVTtBS6u+1H44vXVb1Lm2Kzx1OGt1h7oM3PQ63TqIfM9H kg/GCpwrB+h4ONPE+VTgtGfsVQGmB75i22mpaOQd3xI8KvKghyRMoTPCgBicpjIry4QtwDKQP 4zMeUexk0t70KEdkPsZedJf/LNW0xgWIJe6350byUcSNShf3xu3zcO71IEacZGlPU9kAvbV2K im/7Nnz4J5Oijgz/2vfqpx6bRxh/g3XLPkwmfPAxm24VDQcQZYOBuYM09u68tzj6XZnchJXQk 6iMjKVvG1OKF5Ycwn692qN+JVfao+CnpqkrgUhRDMnjdYSiWqTUB8naValNX49RAxLiWs3i1M Te2XgOGNokH97CHMg8xVzCy/tETUpIeGD9uGmVKB4aHL11fwkbenPlTCaGVhXg987GeUzqNAe 3oJo/fVsKc0EqFJA31r6VXG2hddutsBE6Qu2I8Y6Btcu6ph3LjogkIe2/zPMniIBhYrDHcySi KoZRIwbbbnbs5Jxx8hgqv55swN/S895voDMWcFYe7DRZDn4xbqG7QzufXJd+evmpqI1Ol95GT iIAwMa8PA2pTCokH863jHX8N+G3CprI4Tvpr3xaYr9+WZXdDvCYYKMag8O03GHC0Mmjwf4jY9 ogNZORmcWd2toItGVKzO6QaGV+Px8nNxW6cx8bAsXkZvYEX/Of64IJarFhn0NEqXpLWKap9A5 ifFKHt46kCyVOpG56PUiPOr8+i9R4gLi0wvDtL3nTVwISNBnqVDQG7hjvK2rPFsdZYOK0bSBu UHt0VVpGUUs86MGWxByob6GgwwI=
> kasprintf() returns a pointer to dynamically allocated memory
> which can be NULL upon failure. Ensure the allocation was successful
> by checking the pointer validity.
How do you think about to refer to the function name
instead of the file name in the patch subject?
…
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
…
> @@ -114,6 +124,8 @@ int xen_smp_intr_init(unsigned int cpu)
>
> return 0;
>
> + fail_mem:
> + rc = -ENOMEM;
> fail:
> xen_smp_intr_free(cpu);
> return rc;
Is it currently preferred to start labels in the first text column?
Regards,
Markus
|
