[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eab990d8-9b08-4019-95c6-c71786081236@csgroup.eu>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 23:09:36 +0000
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>,
"pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>, "lee@...nel.org" <lee@...nel.org>,
"vadimp@...dia.com" <vadimp@...dia.com>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"hdegoede@...hat.com" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"mazziesaccount@...il.com" <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
"andy.shevchenko@...il.com" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-leds@...r.kernel.org" <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"kernel@...utedevices.com" <kernel@...utedevices.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] leds: aw2013: unlock mutex before destroying it
Le 04/12/2023 à 19:05, George Stark a écrit :
> In the probe() callback in case of error mutex is destroyed being locked
> which is not allowed so unlock the mute before destroying.
Should there be a fixes: tag ? For instance on 59ea3c9faf32 ("leds: add
aw2013 driver") ?
>
> Signed-off-by: George Stark <gnstark@...utedevices.com>
> ---
> drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c b/drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c
> index 59765640b70f..c2bc0782c0cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c
> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-aw2013.c
> @@ -397,6 +397,7 @@ static int aw2013_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> regulator_disable(chip->vcc_regulator);
>
> error:
> + mutex_unlock(&chip->mutex);
> mutex_destroy(&chip->mutex);
> return ret;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists