On 17/08/07, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The patch titled
> CIFS: check for granted memory
> has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
> cifs-check-for-granted-memory.patch
>
> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
>
> See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
> out what to do about this
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: CIFS: check for granted memory
> From: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
>
> Add a check for granted memory to prevent possible NULL pointer usage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
> Cc: Steven French <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> fs/cifs/sess.c | 4 ++++
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff -puN fs/cifs/sess.c~cifs-check-for-granted-memory fs/cifs/sess.c
> --- a/fs/cifs/sess.c~cifs-check-for-granted-memory
> +++ a/fs/cifs/sess.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,10 @@ CIFS_SessSetup(unsigned int xid, struct
>
> /* 2000 big enough to fit max user, domain, NOS name etc. */
> str_area = kmalloc(2000, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (str_area == NULL) {
> + cifs_small_buf_release(smb_buf);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
The patch, as such, is fine - not arguing against it, but as a matter
of style; don't we usually prefer the "if (!foo)" form over "if (foo
== NULL)" ??
--
Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
