[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9628edde-5270-d5a5-7db6-c9ec3f47c742@st.com>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2019 12:38:18 +0000
From: Fabien DESSENNE <fabien.dessenne@...com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
CC: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: rmi: fix devm_add_action_or_reset() parameter
On 03/05/2019 2:19 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2019, Fabien Dessenne wrote:
>
>> The second parameter of devm_add_action_or_reset() shall be a function,
>> not a function address.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabien Dessenne <fabien.dessenne@...com>
>> ---
>> drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
>> index 9e33165..8748d4d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
>> @@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static int rmi_setup_irq_domain(struct hid_device *hdev)
>> if (!hdata->domain)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> - ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&hdev->dev, &rmi_irq_teardown, hdata);
>> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&hdev->dev, rmi_irq_teardown, hdata);
> Why do you think this is wrong C?
Because I was not aware that both func and &func refer to the same
function pointer.
Now I know :)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists