On Thu, 30 May 2013, Harsh Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday 30 May 2013 12:58 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 30 May 2013, Harsh Kumar wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thursday 30 May 2013 10:41 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >>>> diff -uprN a/drivers/staging/winbond/wb35reg.c b/drivers/staging/winbond/wb35reg.c
> >>>> --- a/drivers/staging/winbond/wb35reg.c 2013-05-28 00:52:26.000000000 +0530
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/winbond/wb35reg.c 2013-05-28
> > 02:11:35.000000000 +0530
> >>>> @@ -64,12 +64,11 @@ unsigned char Wb35Reg_BurstWrite(struct
> >>>>
> >>>> return true;
> >>>> } else {
> >>>> - if (urb)
> >>>> - usb_free_urb(urb);
> >>>> + usb_free_urb(urb);
> >>>
> >>> I took a look at this case. Wouldn't it be nicer to check for failures
> >>> one by one, as done almost everywhere else in the kernel? Then you would
> >>> know what had been successfully allocated and what has to be freed.
> >>>
> >>> julia
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Do you want that values of urb and reg_queue to be checked separately to see which has
> >> failed? That will be more logical. But, then what should be done with the knowledge of
> >> what has failed? Should there be a print or should the return value change?
> >
> > I don't know much about the driver, so a safe thing to do would be just to
> > keep the current semantics. When the kzalloc fails, just return false.
> > When the usb_alloc_urb fails, just kfree and then return false.
> >
> > Also, currently there is a return false at the end of the function that is
> > dead code. Perhaps things could be reorganized so that that is not
> > necessary. Usually, after an allocation, the if just takes care of the
> > error case, and the fallthrough case continues in the normal way.
> >
>
> Okay, got it. I will reorganize the stuff here.
I think that some of the other cases should be changed in the same way.
It is just in the destroy function that the if was not needed.
julia
--
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
