| Message ID | 1478854120-25311-1-git-send-email-shailendra.v@samsung.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Shailendra Verma <shailendra.v@samsung.com> wrote: > From: "Shailendra Verma" <shailendra.v@samsung.com> > > There is no need to call kfree() if memdup_user() fails, as no memory > was allocated and the error in the error-valued pointer should be returned. > > Signed-off-by: Shailendra Verma <shailendra.v@samsung.com> > --- > security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Hello Shailendra, Thank you for your patch, but I prefer the readability of the code as it currently stands.
diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c index 72c145d..b6d0a23 100644 --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c @@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_bool(struct file *filep, const char __user *buf, length = -EINVAL; if (sscanf(page, "%d", &new_value) != 1) - goto out; + goto out1; if (new_value) new_value = 1; @@ -1174,9 +1174,10 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_bool(struct file *filep, const char __user *buf, bool_pending_values[index] = new_value; length = count; +out1: + kfree(page); out: mutex_unlock(&sel_mutex); - kfree(page); return length; }