[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100409133139.1ab17828@bike.lwn.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:31:39 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>,
JosephChan@....com.tw, ScottFang@...tech.com.cn,
Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...top.org>,
linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] [FB] viafb: Fix various resource leaks during
module_init()
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:22:57 +0200
Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de> wrote:
> > if (!viafbinfo->screen_base) {
> > printk(KERN_INFO "ioremap failed\n");
> > - return -ENOMEM;
> > + rc = -EIO;
>
> I don't know whether this is right (changing the return code) as Andrew
> recommend a while ago:
> "It should return -ENOMEM rather than -1, but that's minor."
> So I did and now I wonder which one is correct?
To me it seems like -ENOMEM could be a bit confusing here; there's a lot of
things that could go wrong with that same error return.
That said, I did some digging around, and -ENOMEM does seem to be the
standard response to an ioremap() failure. So I've changed it back.
> > if (!viafbinfo1) {
> > printk(KERN_ERR
> > "allocate the second framebuffer struct error\n");
> > - framebuffer_release(viafbinfo);
> > - return -ENOMEM;
>
> rc = -ENOMEM;
> is missing?
Indeed. Fixed.
Thanks,
jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists