[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120522033501.GB27055@shlinux2.ap.freescale.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:35:02 +0800
From: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@...escale.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC: Dong Aisheng-B29396 <B29396@...escale.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linus.walleij@...ricsson.com" <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 2/2] pinctrl: add pinctrl gpio binding support
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 04:05:46AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
> > + np_gpio = of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle);
> > + if (!np_gpio) {
> > + dev_err(pctldev->dev,
> > + "failed to find gpio node(%s)\n",
> > + np_gpio->name);
>
> Perhaps devm_kfree(ranges) here so that if this is called multiple times
> due to deferred probe, the allocations from the failed attempts don't
> accumulate. Same for other error paths.
>
I checked a bit more, it seems the resource will be removed first if there's
a deffer probe error.
static int really_probe(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *drv)
{
.....
probe_failed:
devres_release_all(dev);
driver_sysfs_remove(dev);
dev->driver = NULL;
if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
/* Driver requested deferred probing */
dev_info(dev, "Driver %s requests probe deferral\n", drv->name);
driver_deferred_probe_add(dev);
...
}
So we may not need devm_kfree for the EPROBE_DEFER error here.
It looks to me reasonable that managed resource covers the defer probe
error.
Regards
Dong Aisheng
--
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