From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A0CF60E for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:05:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Mar 2017 05:05:26 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,231,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="71388356" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.255.134.95]) ([10.255.134.95]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Mar 2017 05:05:24 -0800 To: Rasesh Mody , dev@dpdk.org References: <1488181923-9649-1-git-send-email-rasesh.mody@cavium.com> <1488181923-9649-2-git-send-email-rasesh.mody@cavium.com> Cc: Dept-EngDPDKDev@cavium.com From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <677179b8-eb63-d53d-a0a5-e2c136499d3d@intel.com> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 13:05:22 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1488181923-9649-2-git-send-email-rasesh.mody@cavium.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/21] net/qede/base: fix to set pointers to NULL after freeing X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 13:05:28 -0000 On 2/27/2017 7:51 AM, Rasesh Mody wrote: > Set pointers to NULL after freeing the allocations on ecore_resc_free(). > > Fixes: 26ae839d06e9 ("qede: add DCBX support") > Fixes: ec94dbc57362 ("qede: add base driver") > > Signed-off-by: Rasesh Mody > --- > drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dcbx.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dev.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_spq.c | 2 ++ > 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dcbx.c b/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dcbx.c > index 7380fd8..9ce6dc4 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dcbx.c > +++ b/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dcbx.c > @@ -914,7 +914,7 @@ enum _ecore_status_t ecore_dcbx_info_alloc(struct ecore_hwfn *p_hwfn) > void ecore_dcbx_info_free(struct ecore_hwfn *p_hwfn, > struct ecore_dcbx_info *p_dcbx_info) > { > - OSAL_FREE(p_hwfn->p_dev, p_hwfn->p_dcbx_info); > + p_hwfn->p_dcbx_info = OSAL_NULL; Is replacing free with "NULL assignment" intentional? >>From commit log and other updates in this patch, intention looks like setting pointers to NULL after freeing them. > } > > static void ecore_dcbx_update_protocol_data(struct protocol_dcb_data *p_data, > diff --git a/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dev.c b/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dev.c > index 0518fc7..15051b6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dev.c > +++ b/drivers/net/qede/base/ecore_dev.c > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ void ecore_resc_free(struct ecore_dev *p_dev) > p_dev->fw_data = OSAL_NULL; > > OSAL_FREE(p_dev, p_dev->reset_stats); > + p_dev->reset_stats = OSAL_NULL; Since already a macro used for free, does it make sense to make NULL assignment part of macro?