[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9aaa867-bb11-a469-a4b9-03fb68a18c56@web.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 11:42:47 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/14] irqchip/xilinx-intc: Fix potential resource leak
> In the function xilinx_intc_of_init(), system resource "irqc->root_domain"
> was not released in the error case. Thus add jump target for the completion
> of the desired exception handling.
Another small wording adjustment:
… Thus add a jump target …
…
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
…
> @@ -250,6 +250,8 @@ static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct device_node *intc,
>
> return 0;
>
> +error_domain_remove:
> + irq_domain_remove(irqc->root_domain);
> error:
> iounmap(irqc->base);
…
Can labels like “remove_irq_domain” and “unmap_io” be nicer?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists