Thread (9 messages) 9 messages, 2 authors, 2026-01-27

Re: [net,v2,1/2] net: liquidio: Fix off-by-one error in setup_nic_devices() cleanup

From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Date: 2026-01-26 15:56:12
Also in: lkml

On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 03:50:39PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.

For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
net: liquidio: Fix off-by-one error in setup_nic_devices() cleanup

This patch changes the cleanup loop from while(i--) to do{}while(i--)
to ensure that when a device fails to initialize, it gets cleaned up
along with all previously initialized devices.
quoted
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_main.c
index 0732440eeacd..3ba2806f5d1e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/liquidio/lio_main.c
@@ -3765,11 +3765,11 @@ static int setup_nic_devices(struct octeon_device *octeon_dev)

 setup_nic_dev_free:

-	while (i--) {
+	do {
 		dev_err(&octeon_dev->pci_dev->dev,
 			"NIC ifidx:%d Setup failed\n", i);
 		liquidio_destroy_nic_device(octeon_dev, i);
-	}
+	} while (i--);
In lio_main.c, setup_nic_devices() can also reach setup_nic_dev_free from
the devlink_alloc() failure path after the main for loop completes. At that
point i equals ifcount (the loop counter has been incremented past the last
valid device).

With the do-while change, the first iteration will call
liquidio_destroy_nic_device(octeon_dev, ifcount) for a device index that
was never initialized. The function has a guard for NULL netdev so it will
not crash, but it will print a spurious error message about a device that
never existed.

The fix works correctly for failures within the loop (which is the case
described in the commit message), but is there a way to handle the
post-loop devlink_alloc() failure case without printing the spurious
error message?
Sorry for not realising this when I made this suggestion in
my review of v1.

Also, I would suggest splitting this patch in two: one patch
per driver.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help