Initializing automatic __free variables to NULL without need (e.g. branches with different allocations), followed by actual allocation is in contrary to explicit coding rules guiding cleanup.h:
"Given that the "__free(...) = NULL" pattern for variables defined at the top of the function poses this potential interdependency problem the recommendation is to always define and assign variables in one statement and not group variable definitions at the top of the function when __free() is used."
Code does not have a bug, but is less readable and uses discouraged coding practice, so fix that by moving declaration to the place of assignment.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com --- drivers/tee/qcomtee/user_obj.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tee/qcomtee/user_obj.c b/drivers/tee/qcomtee/user_obj.c index 0139905f2684..6aa3aefd67f0 100644 --- a/drivers/tee/qcomtee/user_obj.c +++ b/drivers/tee/qcomtee/user_obj.c @@ -228,10 +228,10 @@ static int qcomtee_user_object_dispatch(struct qcomtee_object_invoke_ctx *oic, { struct qcomtee_user_object *uo = to_qcomtee_user_object(object); struct qcomtee_context_data *ctxdata = uo->ctx->data; - struct qcomtee_ureq *ureq __free(kfree) = NULL; int errno;
- ureq = kzalloc(sizeof(*ureq), GFP_KERNEL); + struct qcomtee_ureq *ureq __free(kfree) = kzalloc(sizeof(*ureq), + GFP_KERNEL); if (!ureq) return -ENOMEM;
@@ -367,10 +367,10 @@ int qcomtee_user_param_to_object(struct qcomtee_object **object, struct tee_param *param, struct tee_context *ctx) { - struct qcomtee_user_object *user_object __free(kfree) = NULL; int err;
- user_object = kzalloc(sizeof(*user_object), GFP_KERNEL); + struct qcomtee_user_object *user_object __free(kfree) = + kzalloc(sizeof(*user_object), GFP_KERNEL); if (!user_object) return -ENOMEM;