linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/10] drivers/net/can/flexcan.c: add missing clk

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4DE67CBF.5080006@bfs.de>
Date:	Wed, 01 Jun 2011 19:54:07 +0200
From:	walter harms <wharms@....de>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
CC:	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/10] drivers/net/can/flexcan.c: add missing clk_put



Am 01.06.2011 19:10, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
> 
> The failed_get label is used after the call to clk_get has succeeded, so it
> should be moved up above the call to clk_put.
> 
> A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
> follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @r exists@
> expression e1,e2;
> statement S;
> @@
> 
> e1 = clk_get@p1(...);
> ... when != e1 = e2
>     when != clk_put(e1)
>     when any
> if (...) { ... when != clk_put(e1)
>                when != if (...) { ... clk_put(e1) ... }
> * return@p3 ...;
>  } else S
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/net/can/flexcan.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
> index d499056..121739c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
> @@ -978,8 +978,8 @@ static int __devinit flexcan_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   failed_map:
>  	release_mem_region(mem->start, mem_size);
>   failed_req:
> -	clk_put(clk);
>   failed_get:
> +	clk_put(clk);
>   failed_clock:
>  	return err;
>  }
> 

So failed_req == failed_get, is that intended ?

re,
 wh
--
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/