[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871shqbnln.fsf@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 10:48:04 +0200
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, bhumirks@...il.com, leoyang.li@....com
Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] usb: gadget: fotg210-udc: Fixes and cleanup
Hi,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> writes:
> This serie aims to fix 2 issues. (path 2 & 4)
>
> The 2nd patch fixes a memory leak. It uses devm_ function a simplify the
> handling of the memory.
>
> The 4th patch fixes a potential invalid pointer dereference.
>
> The 2 other ones, are just clean-ups to remove useless code and add other
> uses of devm_ function to simplify code.
>
> I've left the request_irq/free_irq because I'm unsure of potential side
> effects if some other resources are freed while an IRQ can still be
> triggered. So I've preferred to leave it as-is.
>
> Christophe JAILLET (4):
> usb: gadget: fotg210-udc: Remove a useless
> usb: gadget: fotg210-udc: Fix a memory leak
> usb: gadget: fotg210-udc: Simplify code
> usb: gadget: fotg210-udc: Fix a potential invalid pointer dereference
you should NEVER make fixes depend on cleanups. It should be the other
way around :-) First fixes, then cleanups. The reason is that fixes can
get accepted during -rc cycle, but cleanups must wait until the next
merge window.
Please fix up your patches, otherwise I'll have to apply the entire
series for v4.17
--
balbi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists