Hi Wei, On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:52:00PM +0800, weiyj_lk@xxxxxxx wrote: > From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Add the missing unlock before return from function > vpfe_prepare_pipeline() in the error handling case. > > video->lock is lock/unlock in function vpfe_open(), > and no need to unlock it here, so remove unlock > video->lock. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c > index 3ec7e65..db49af9 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c > @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static int vpfe_prepare_pipeline(struct vpfe_video_device *video) > mutex_lock(&mdev->graph_mutex); > ret = media_entity_graph_walk_init(&graph, entity->graph_obj.mdev); > if (ret) { > - mutex_unlock(&video->lock); > + mutex_unlock(&mdev->graph_mutex); Oh dear. I wonder how could this have happened... thanks for the fix! I've applied this to my tree. > return -ENOMEM; > } > media_entity_graph_walk_start(&graph, entity); > -- Kind regards, Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx XMPP: sailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel