On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 07:50:12AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We need to move the unlock before the kfree(dev);
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Applies to linux-next.
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/video/em28xx/em28xx-video.c b/drivers/media/video/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
> > index ecb23df..78d6ebd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/video/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/video/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
> > @@ -2264,9 +2264,9 @@ static int em28xx_v4l2_close(struct file *filp)
> > if (dev->state & DEV_DISCONNECTED) {
> > em28xx_release_resources(dev);
>
> Why not unlocking here?
I don't see a reason to prefer one over the other.
regards,
dan carpenter
>
> > kfree(dev->alt_max_pkt_size);
> > + mutex_unlock(&dev->lock);
> > kfree(dev);
> > kfree(fh);
> > - mutex_unlock(&dev->lock);
>
> Thanks,
> Ezequiel.
> --
> 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
--
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
