On Sun, 2018-12-09 at 21:45 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>
> > > The memory chunk allocated by hid_allocate_device() should be
> > > released
> > > by hid_destroy_device(), not kfree().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 0b28cb4bcb1("HID: intel-ish-hid: ISH HID client driver")
> > > Signed-off-by: Pan Bian <bianpan2016@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/hid/intel-ish-hid/ishtp-hid.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hid/intel-ish-hid/ishtp-hid.c
> > > b/drivers/hid/intel-ish-hid/ishtp-hid.c
> > > index cd23903..e918d78 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hid/intel-ish-hid/ishtp-hid.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/hid/intel-ish-hid/ishtp-hid.c
> > > @@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ int ishtp_hid_probe(unsigned int cur_hid_dev,
> > > err_hid_device:
> > > kfree(hid_data);
> > > err_hid_data:
> > > - kfree(hid);
> > > + hid_destroy_device(hid);
> >
> > Looks good to me. Srinivas, any comments?
> > FWIW:
> > Reviewed-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Jiri, do you think we should send this one as 4.20/fixes material
> > or
> > wait for 4.21?
>
> Given that this has been around since 4.9, I wouldn't be devastated
> if it
> lands only in next merge window. So I'd just put it to 4.20/fixes and
> wait
> for other more serious trigger for sending that to Linus eventually.
>
Agree.
Thanks,
Srinivas
> Thanks,
>
