On Sat, 15 Jul 2017, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Sat 2017-07-15 09:48:53, Julia Lawall wrote: > > for_each_child_of_node performs an of_node_get on each iteration, so a > > return from the loop requires an of_node_put. > > > > The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr): > > > > // <smpl> > > @@ > > local idexpression n; > > expression e,e1; > > iterator name for_each_child_of_node; > > @@ > > > > for_each_child_of_node(e1,n) { > > ... > > ( > > of_node_put(n); > > | > > e = n > > | > > return n; > > | > > + of_node_put(n); > > ? return ...; > > ) > > ... > > } > > // </smpl> > > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@xxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> > > > @@ -230,12 +230,18 @@ tlc591xx_probe(struct i2c_client *client > > > > for_each_child_of_node(np, child) { > > err = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", ®); > > - if (err) > > + if (err) { > > + of_node_put(child); > > return err; > > - if (reg < 0 || reg >= tlc591xx->max_leds) > > + } > > + if (reg < 0 || reg >= tlc591xx->max_leds) { > > + of_node_put(child); > > return -EINVAL; > > - if (priv->leds[reg].active) > > + } > > + if (priv->leds[reg].active) { > > + of_node_put(child); > > return -EINVAL; > > + } > > I'd combine last two if()s into one... The test won't all fit on one line. Should I do it anyway? 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
