Request_region should be used with release_region, not release_resource. base_res is also dropped because it is no longer needed. The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // <smpl> @@ expression x,E; @@ *x = request_region(...) ... when != release_region(x) when != x = E * release_resource(x); // </smpl> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@xxxxxxx> --- In the original code, the second argument of request_region is 32 and the second argument of the following release_region is 0x8. I have thus used 0x8 as the second argument of the call to release_region introduced to replace the call to release_resource. But shouldn't the second arguments of all of the functions be the same? drivers/parport/parport_pc.c | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/parport/parport_pc.c b/drivers/parport/parport_pc.c index 8d62fb7..320a4df 100644 --- a/drivers/parport/parport_pc.c +++ b/drivers/parport/parport_pc.c @@ -2550,7 +2550,6 @@ static int __devinit sio_ite_8872_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, int autoirq, const struct parport_pc_via_data *via) { short inta_addr[6] = { 0x2A0, 0x2C0, 0x220, 0x240, 0x1E0 }; - struct resource *base_res; u32 ite8872set; u32 ite8872_lpt, ite8872_lpthi; u8 ite8872_irq, type; @@ -2561,8 +2560,7 @@ static int __devinit sio_ite_8872_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, int autoirq, /* make sure which one chip */ for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) { - base_res = request_region(inta_addr[i], 32, "it887x"); - if (base_res) { + if (request_region(inta_addr[i], 32, "it887x")) { int test; pci_write_config_dword(pdev, 0x60, 0xe5000000 | inta_addr[i]); @@ -2635,7 +2633,7 @@ static int __devinit sio_ite_8872_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, int autoirq, /* * Release the resource so that parport_pc_probe_port can get it. */ - release_resource(base_res); + release_region(inta_addr[i], 0x8); if (parport_pc_probe_port(ite8872_lpt, ite8872_lpthi, irq, PARPORT_DMA_NONE, &pdev->dev, 0)) { printk(KERN_INFO -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
