Messages in this thread | | | From | Kees Cook <> | Date | Thu, 8 Sep 2016 13:45:06 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] ramoops: move spin_lock_init after kmalloc error checking |
| |
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Geliang Tang <geliangtang@gmail.com> wrote: > If cxt->pstore.buf allocated failed, no need to initialize > cxt->pstore.buf_lock. So this patch moves spin_lock_init() after the > error checking. > > Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <geliangtang@gmail.com> > --- > fs/pstore/ram.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c > index 7a034d6..ec1c9e5 100644 > --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c > +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c > @@ -608,12 +608,12 @@ static int ramoops_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > cxt->pstore.bufsize = 1024; /* LOG_LINE_MAX */ > cxt->pstore.bufsize = max(cxt->record_size, cxt->pstore.bufsize); > cxt->pstore.buf = kmalloc(cxt->pstore.bufsize, GFP_KERNEL); > - spin_lock_init(&cxt->pstore.buf_lock); > if (!cxt->pstore.buf) { > pr_err("cannot allocate pstore buffer\n"); > err = -ENOMEM; > goto fail_clear; > } > + spin_lock_init(&cxt->pstore.buf_lock);
Seems fine to me. No harm either way, but better to save on the work. :) Applied for -next.
Thanks!
-Kees
> > err = pstore_register(&cxt->pstore); > if (err) { > -- > 2.7.4 >
-- Kees Cook Nexus Security
| |