similar to: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: add the missed kfree() for nouveau_bo_alloc()

> ? to fix it. I suggest to replace this wording by the tag ?Fixes?. ? > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c > @@ -276,8 +276,10 @@ nouveau_bo_alloc(struct nouveau_cli *cli, u64 *size, int *align, u32 flags, > break; > } > > - if (WARN_ON(pi < 0)) > + if (WARN_ON(pi < 0)) { > + kfree(nvbo); > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > + } I propose to

ping... On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:09 PM Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 4:14 PM Navid Emamdoost > <navid.emamdoost at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > In the implementation of nouveau_bo_alloc() if it fails to determine the > > target page size via pi, then the allocated memory for nvbo should be > >

In the implementation of nouveau_bo_alloc() if it fails to determine the target page size via pi, then the allocated memory for nvbo should be released. Fixes: 019cbd4a4feb ("drm/nouveau: Initialize GEM object before TTM object") Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost at gmail.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 4:14 PM Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost at gmail.com> wrote: > > In the implementation of nouveau_bo_alloc() if it fails to determine the > target page size via pi, then the allocated memory for nvbo should be > released. > > Fixes: 019cbd4a4feb ("drm/nouveau: Initialize GEM object before TTM object") > Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost

> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c > @@ -276,8 +276,10 @@ nouveau_bo_alloc(struct nouveau_cli *cli, u64 *size, int *align, u32 flags, > break; > } > > - if (WARN_ON(pi < 0)) > + if (WARN_ON(pi < 0)) { > + kfree(nvbo); > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > + } > > /* Disable compression if suitable settings couldn't be found. */ > if

This patch performs the following changes: 1. remove a redundant parentheses around the nvkm_acr_lsfw_add() calls 2. do assignment before this if condition, it is more readable Signed-off-by: Jing Xiangfeng <jingxiangfeng at huawei.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/acr/lsfw.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

On Sat, Sep 07, 2019 at 09:58:46PM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 7:55 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:33:58PM +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 20:14, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > >

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 7:55 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:33:58PM +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 20:14, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Changing the order doesn't look hard. Patch attached (untested, have

Even when core AGP support is compiled in Radeon and Nouveau can also work with the PCI GART. The AGP support was notorious unstable and hard to maintain, so deprecate it for now and only enable it if there is a good reason to do so. Signed-off-by: Christian K?nig <christian.koenig at amd.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 01:03:13PM +0200, Christian K?nig wrote: > Even when core AGP support is compiled in Radeon and > Nouveau can also work with the PCI GART. > > The AGP support was notorious unstable and hard to > maintain, so deprecate it for now and only enable it if > there is a good reason to do so. > > Signed-off-by: Christian K?nig <christian.koenig at

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:33:58PM +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 20:14, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Changing the order doesn't look hard. Patch attached (untested, have no > > > > test hardware). But maybe I missed some detail ... > > > > > > I came up with

From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com> Hi Ben, these are fixes for a couple of issues that I've been running into when testing on various Tegra boards. The first two patches fix up issues in the fix that I had sent out earlier to fix the regression introduced in drm-misc-next. The first one is critical because it avoids a BUG_ON as reported by Ilia, while the second is less

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 03:31, Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars at kernel.org> wrote: > > Replace the existing /* fall through */ comments and its variants with > the new pseudo-keyword macro fallthrough[1]. Also, remove unnecessary > fall-through markings when it is the case. I really like this! I was not a fan of explicitly marking those with comments. Thank you, taken in my

priv porinter could be free only when priv != null and priv->rom is null. --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c index 9b91da0..d776e01 100644 ---

priv porinter could be free only when priv != null and priv->rom is null. Signed-off-by: wuxu.wu <wuxu.wu at huawei.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/shadowpci.c index 9b91da0..d776e01 100644 ---

(re-sending as plain text) NACK. The before and after of this patch are functionally identical. The if-block returns unconditionally ("return priv;"), so the kfree will only ever be reached if the condition in the if-statement evaluates to false. Explicitly writing out an else-block is thus superfluous. Op 03-01-2020 om 09:10 schreef wuxu.wu: > Hi, I think there has a incorrect

don't free vp_dev until vp_dev->vdev.dev.release be called. Signed-off-by: weiping zhang <zhangweiping at didichuxing.com> --- drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c | 17 +++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c index 1c4797e..91d20f7 100644 ---

don't free vp_vdev until vp_vdev.dev.release be called. Signed-off-by: weiping zhang <zhangweiping at didichuxing.com> --- drivers/misc/mic/vop/vop_main.c | 16 +++++++++------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/misc/mic/vop/vop_main.c b/drivers/misc/mic/vop/vop_main.c index a341938..8c716a0 100644 --- a/drivers/misc/mic/vop/vop_main.c +++

On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 23:55:16 +0800 weiping zhang <zhangweiping at didichuxing.com> wrote: > don't free vp_dev until vp_dev->vdev.dev.release be called. Maybe add the same description as in your virtio_mmio patch so that it is clear why the kfree() is not ok? > > Signed-off-by: weiping zhang <zhangweiping at didichuxing.com> > --- >

As mentioned at drivers/base/core.c: /* * NOTE: _Never_ directly free @dev after calling this function, even * if it returned an error! Always use put_device() to give up the * reference initialized in this function instead. */ so we don't free vp_vdev until vp_vdev.dev.release be called. Signed-off-by: weiping zhang <zhangweiping at didichuxing.com> ---