Friday 11 December 2009 14:11:49 Jarkko Nikula napisał(a):
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 21:31:20 +0100
>
> Janusz Krzysztofik <jkrzyszt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -391,6 +405,10 @@ int omap_mcbsp_request(unsigned int id)
> > }
> > mcbsp = id_to_mcbsp_ptr(id);
> >
> > + mcbsp->reg_cache = kzalloc(omap_mcbsp_cache_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!mcbsp->reg_cache)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > spin_lock(&mcbsp->lock);
> > if (!mcbsp->free) {
> > dev_err(mcbsp->dev, "McBSP%d is currently in use\n",
>
> Great work. Could have my ack to patches 1-4 by moving the cache
> allocation after the mcbsp->free test lines. Memory leak and other
> badness would happen otherwise in case of multiple call to
> omap_mcbsp_request.
Yes, it's a bug, sorry.
> Just send an update to this mail if there is no comments to another
> patches.
OK.
Thanks,
Janusz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
