On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 04:44:16PM +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 2022/11/10 16:18, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 11:48:09AM +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote: > > > Current some drivers(like iscsi) call transport_register_device() > > > failed, they don't call transport_destroy_device() to release the > > > memory allocated in transport_setup_device(), because they don't > > > know what was done, it should be internal thing to release the > > > resource in register function. So fix this leak by calling destroy > > > function inside register function. > > > > > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > > > Signed-off-by: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > include/linux/transport_class.h | 9 ++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/transport_class.h b/include/linux/transport_class.h > > > index 63076fb835e3..f4835250bbfc 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/transport_class.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/transport_class.h > > > @@ -70,8 +70,15 @@ void transport_destroy_device(struct device *); > > > static inline int > > > transport_register_device(struct device *dev) > > > { > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > transport_setup_device(dev); > > > - return transport_add_device(dev); > > > + ret = transport_add_device(dev); > > > + if (ret) { > > > + transport_destroy_device(dev); > > > + } > > Please use scripts/checkpatch.pl on your patches before sending them out > Sure, of course. :) > > so you don't get grumpy maintainers asking you to use > > scripts/checkpatch.pl on your patches :) > I sent a fix patch to iscsi system earlier: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-scsi/patch/20221109092421.3111613-1-yangyingliang@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > Mike give his point in the mail, so I send a new patch keep iscsi > maintainers Cced. That's fine, but the code you wrote here should look different as it does not follow our coding style rules. That is the point I was trying to make. thanks, greg k-h