[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0c3372cf-342f-81c7-fab8-4a68e59ebbd2@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:12:21 +0800
From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Yi Zhang" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: sirf: Add missing put_device() call in
sirfsoc_gpio_probe()
On 2020/6/3 2:56, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> in sirfsoc_gpio_probe(), if of_find_device_by_node() succeed,
>> put_device() is missing in the error handling patch.
>
> How do you think about another wording variant?
>
> A coccicheck run provided information like the following.
>
> drivers/pinctrl/sirf/pinctrl-sirf.c:798:2-8: ERROR: missing put_device;
> call of_find_device_by_node on line 792, but without a corresponding
> object release within this function.
>
> Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/free/put_device.cocci
>
> Thus add a jump target to fix the exception handling for this
> function implementation.
>
>
> Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message?
>
Will do, thanks for your advise!
Yu Kuai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists