[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:59:52 -0400
From: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
To: Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>
Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...glemail.com>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ldv-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] carl9170: fix leaks at failure path in
carl9170_usb_probe()
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 01:16:20AM -0400, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> On 28.09.2013 00:17, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> >On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Alexey Khoroshilov
> ><khoroshilov@...ras.ru> wrote:
> >
> >>- return request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, 1, CARL9170FW_NAME,
> >>+ err = request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, 1, CARL9170FW_NAME,
> >> &ar->udev->dev, GFP_KERNEL, ar, carl9170_usb_firmware_step2);
> >>+ if (err) {
> >>+ usb_put_dev(udev);
> >>+ usb_put_dev(udev);
> >You are doing the same free twice.
> Yes, because it was get twice.
> >I guess you meant to also free: usb_put_dev(ar->udev)
> udev and ar->udev are equal, so technically the patch is correct.
>
> I agree that there is some inconsistency, but I would prefer to fix
> it at usb_get_dev() side with a comment about reasons for the double
> get.
What is the reason for the double get?
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@...driver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists