Re: [PATCH] PNPBIOS: check return value of pnp_add_device()

[Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

Hi Rafael,

On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 04:11:05AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> pnp_add_device() may fail so we need to handle errors and avoid leaking
> memory.
> 
> Also, when pnp_alloc_dev fails, return -ENOMEM rather than -1.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>

Any issues with this patch and a similar one to PNPACPI?

Thanks!

> ---
>  drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c | 12 +++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c b/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c
> index 9b86a01..074569e 100644
> --- a/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c
> @@ -312,18 +312,19 @@ static int __init insert_device(struct pnp_bios_node *node)
>  	struct list_head *pos;
>  	struct pnp_dev *dev;
>  	char id[8];
> +	int error;
>  
>  	/* check if the device is already added */
>  	list_for_each(pos, &pnpbios_protocol.devices) {
>  		dev = list_entry(pos, struct pnp_dev, protocol_list);
>  		if (dev->number == node->handle)
> -			return -1;
> +			return -EEXIST;
>  	}
>  
>  	pnp_eisa_id_to_string(node->eisa_id & PNP_EISA_ID_MASK, id);
>  	dev = pnp_alloc_dev(&pnpbios_protocol, node->handle, id);
>  	if (!dev)
> -		return -1;
> +		return -ENOMEM;
>  
>  	pnpbios_parse_data_stream(dev, node);
>  	dev->active = pnp_is_active(dev);
> @@ -342,7 +343,12 @@ static int __init insert_device(struct pnp_bios_node *node)
>  	if (!dev->active)
>  		pnp_init_resources(dev);
>  
> -	pnp_add_device(dev);
> +	error = pnp_add_device(dev);
> +	if (error) {
> +		put_device(&dev->dev);
> +		return error;
> +	}
> +
>  	pnpbios_interface_attach_device(node);
>  
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dmitry

-- 
Dmitry