[PATCH] cxgb4: fix memory leak on txq_info

From: Colin Ian King <redacted>

Currently if txq_info->uldtxq cannot be allocated then
txq_info->txq is being kfree'd (which is redundant because it
is NULL) instead of txq_info. Fix this by instead kfree'ing
txq_info.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_uld.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_uld.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_uld.c
index 565a6c6..8098902 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_uld.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_uld.c

@@ -532,7 +532,7 @@ setup_sge_txq_uld(struct adapter *adap, unsigned int uld_type,
 	txq_info->uldtxq = kcalloc(txq_info->ntxq, sizeof(struct sge_uld_txq),
 				   GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!txq_info->uldtxq) {
-		kfree(txq_info->uldtxq);
+		kfree(txq_info);
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	}
 

-- 
2.10.2

From: Colin King <redacted>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:02:44 +0000

From: Colin Ian King <redacted>

Currently if txq_info->uldtxq cannot be allocated then
txq_info->txq is being kfree'd (which is redundant because it
is NULL) instead of txq_info. Fix this by instead kfree'ing
txq_info.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <redacted>

Applied, but Colin you _really_ need to start properly marking your
networking patch submissions by indicating in the subject which
tree your change is for.  In this case I figured out it was
net-next, but you must say this explicitly in the Subject line
via "Subject: [PATCH net-next] ..."

Thanks.

On 25/11/16 21:10, David Miller wrote:

From: Colin King <redacted>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:02:44 +0000

quoted

From: Colin Ian King <redacted>

Currently if txq_info->uldtxq cannot be allocated then
txq_info->txq is being kfree'd (which is redundant because it
is NULL) instead of txq_info. Fix this by instead kfree'ing
txq_info.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <redacted>

Applied, but Colin you _really_ need to start properly marking your
networking patch submissions by indicating in the subject which
tree your change is for.  In this case I figured out it was
net-next, but you must say this explicitly in the Subject line
via "Subject: [PATCH net-next] ..."

Thanks.

Understood, will do next time, apologies for that.

Colin