From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86360A04B1;
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:14:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECCB21D704;
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:14:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com (mail-io1-f67.google.com
[209.85.166.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B281D6F7;
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:14:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id y74so5789380iof.12;
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=yN9ylgjq2OY2LlsMm0glHm/Rx8nslCz8dFgXC017wR8=;
b=d6eBWl/adS9AD4ygUQ1nrVPoDx/s5QJU1uunCqWWS3RV52t9FM+2dZIiD6r+Mznrjx
xBK4huS0V/auOxj3EjvU6V4t+9UMQlbZyMAZ457vy/PjB/ZFJt+pUGkPM+ZIX40v5+RD
suGO4I7I/OoUx8WNu973XgLj78R3RwBUHQNMKbP8WkLcAqVQbxX0v5g8igNOp4FPCCqy
AL8cpIALKL2o4oMgQNlX9/3IVnNqh7FczqyPiW4cqYN3QXxFKrfKmoF640tNprdDnapW
thOVDANCAe/IuRn61k8PKxU5v0hfkFjVRFKWUAAxF5ozVuVlEwZWTUp6AW7tw781ALmo
hKOA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=yN9ylgjq2OY2LlsMm0glHm/Rx8nslCz8dFgXC017wR8=;
b=LFAlPdJ/XhwAOyeoR4Moe0aCfeMHiSsL/kV2o6dDvCbtXurooz/r/Ho3XdkdjU5MvF
aJM2Nm2qmhZl5HzqU/ole/PHJ8zzj43WnfgsBwYT2hWeRc+8w09Vb9xeJNA6/cGe/ry1
PUIMIB06jspNiR/C9gfgN2NRtQxFysrzZk/vikbEU6Jj7pivcBycdXalrq0DcICk/Ez4
zEOsTJFO1tNP2vmNk01Sh9vy7SjrmNVDgPnGP1Hw3HqqtvldaLaKQo9K+41YO+NJxsEE
rQhDx32gf/zuuGTn5bPm8Kt0uYPGQuS3Quw8qImjkKcCohb2yiPg2Mpvbg4julhdEtJW
H+jg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53120yIAvFBgO6DiEFefUEk38OfDxuTDXfqGNrNdjjAA6kA3yvA3
LdmbkfrIdQdJ7ny3IfsyqPNoCW53VFin3SMOUH8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3QNO+mkh88TOk19kZy56/LlcOOyyqtFHSkde209c4Fk3kYOPSEQFtF11QRmWAtQ3ZDd+tMztQBSZb7U+Eay8=
X-Received: by 2002:a5e:9916:: with SMTP id t22mr3386589ioj.163.1601403292732;
Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ca775c2d9670d3133515c6abd81acedf3c19222c.1598418485.git.wangyunjian@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <ca775c2d9670d3133515c6abd81acedf3c19222c.1598418485.git.wangyunjian@huawei.com>
From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 23:44:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CALBAE1O8AxjjHwquHgEBh1DNS6pTU48=ADeuC3Gtf_Xiqh7KOw@mail.gmail.com>
To: wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>,
Kiran Kumar K <kirankumark@marvell.com>,
"Lilijun (Jerry)" <jerry.lilijun@huawei.com>, xudingke <xudingke@huawei.com>,
dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/octeontx2: remove logically dead code
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 4:48 PM wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
>
> Coverity issue: 357719
> Fixes: da138cd47e06 ("net/octeontx2: handle port reconfigure")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c
> index 33b72bd4d..3f9399cc8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/octeontx2/otx2_ethdev.c
> @@ -1355,8 +1355,6 @@ nix_store_queue_cfg_and_then_release(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
> fail:
See below
> if (tx_qconf)
> free(tx_qconf);
> - if (rx_qconf)
> - free(rx_qconf);
I think, it is clean and maintainable code have free() if rx_qconf as
if we add some another
exit error case in the future, we simply forget to add this check and
it will fail. So I prefer to keep
as-is for the sake of maintainability as there is no harm.
>
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
> --
> 2.23.0
>
>