[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 1/7] lib: Introduce igt_memdup()

[Modem, Bhanuprakash]

> From: igt-dev <igt-dev-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Ville
> Syrjala
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 6:30 PM
> To: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 1/7] lib: Introduce igt_memdup()
> 
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> 
> Provide a helper to do the malloc()+memcpy() in one swift blow.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/igt_aux.c | 11 +++++++++++
>  lib/igt_aux.h |  2 ++
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/igt_aux.c b/lib/igt_aux.c
> index 1217f5e88094..2445e483e210 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_aux.c
> +++ b/lib/igt_aux.c
> @@ -1527,3 +1527,14 @@ uint64_t vfs_file_max(void)
>  	}
>  	return max;
>  }
> +
> +void *igt_memdup(const void *ptr, size_t len)
> +{
> +	void *dup;
> +
> +	dup = malloc(len);
> +	if (dup)
> +		memcpy(dup, ptr, len);
> +
> +	return dup;

Don't we need to handle the malloc() failures?
If it is fine to return NULL (in case of malloc failure) from here,
I haven't seen that any caller (Other patches in this series) is handling
this NULL.

- Bhanu

> +}
> diff --git a/lib/igt_aux.h b/lib/igt_aux.h
> index 30b175d70d8b..a3c477abcd86 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_aux.h
> +++ b/lib/igt_aux.h
> @@ -324,4 +324,6 @@ void igt_lsof(const char *dpath);
> 
>  uint64_t vfs_file_max(void);
> 
> +void *igt_memdup(const void *ptr, size_t len);
> +
>  #endif /* IGT_AUX_H */
> --
> 2.32.0