4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
[ Upstream commit 0d3bd18a5efd66097ef58622b898d3139790aa9d ]
In case cma_init_reserved_mem failed, need to free the memblock allocated by memblock_reserve or memblock_alloc_range.
Quote Catalin's comments: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/26/482
Kmemleak is supposed to work with the memblock_{alloc,free} pair and it ignores the memblock_reserve() as a memblock_alloc() implementation detail. It is, however, tolerant to memblock_free() being called on a sub-range or just a different range from a previous memblock_alloc(). So the original patch looks fine to me. FWIW:
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190227144631.16708-1-peng.fan@nxp.com Signed-off-by: Peng Fan peng.fan@nxp.com Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas catalin.marinas@arm.com Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport rppt@linux.ibm.com Cc: Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com Cc: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com Cc: Michal Hocko mhocko@suse.com Cc: Vlastimil Babka vbabka@suse.cz Cc: Marek Szyprowski m.szyprowski@samsung.com Cc: Andrey Konovalov andreyknvl@google.com Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- mm/cma.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c index 397687fc51f9..b5d8847497a3 100644 --- a/mm/cma.c +++ b/mm/cma.c @@ -339,12 +339,14 @@ int __init cma_declare_contiguous(phys_addr_t base,
ret = cma_init_reserved_mem(base, size, order_per_bit, res_cma); if (ret) - goto err; + goto free_mem;
pr_info("Reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, &base); return 0;
+free_mem: + memblock_free(base, size); err: pr_err("Failed to reserve %ld MiB\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M); return ret;