[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1212081731080.1984@hadrien>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 17:37:45 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: cbou@...l.ru, dwmw2@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: question about drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c
The function pm860x_charger_probe in the file
drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c contains the following code:
count = pdev->num_resources;
for (i = 0, j = 0; i < count; i++) {
info->irq[j] = platform_get_irq(pdev, i);
if (info->irq[j] < 0)
continue;
j++;
}
info->irq_nums = j;
and then later the following code:
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(info->irq); i++) {
ret = request_threaded_irq(info->irq[i], NULL,
pm860x_irq_descs[i].handler,
IRQF_ONESHOT, pm860x_irq_descs[i].name, info);
...
}
and finally, in the function pm860x_charger_remove, the code:
free_irq(info->irq[0], info);
for (i = 0; i < info->irq_nums; i++)
free_irq(info->irq[i], info);
It looks like the irq_nums field is being used to record how many
platform_get_irq calls were successful, but this information is not used
in the second block of code, where request_threaded_irq is called. So it
would seem that all of the requested irqs should be freed, and not just
the first irq_nums of them.
The remove code also looks like a double free of info->irq[0].
Could I just get rid of the irq_nums field completely? It doesn't seem to
be used elsewhere. Also, I was planning to use devm_request_threaded_irq,
so then there won't be a need for the explicit frees at all.
This file also contains a kfree of devm_kzalloc'd data, which is why I
looked at it in the first place.
thanks,
julia
--
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