At 2022-06-28 11:59:45, "Tony Lindgren" <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>* Liang He <windhl@xxxxxxx> [220621 12:14]:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pmic-cpcap.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pmic-cpcap.c
>> index 668dc84fd31e..a7368d657aa8 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pmic-cpcap.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pmic-cpcap.c
>> @@ -238,8 +238,11 @@ static struct omap_voltdm_pmic omap4_fan_iva = {
>> int __init omap4_cpcap_init(void)
>> {
>> struct voltagedomain *voltdm;
>> + struct device_node *np;
>>
>> - if (!of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "motorola,cpcap"))
>> + np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "motorola,cpcap");
>> + of_node_put(np);
>> + if (!np)
>> return -ENODEV;
>
>Hmm so here you are checking for !np after of_node_put()?
Hi, Tony.
Thanks very much for your effort to review my code.
I just wanted to use this 'check-after-put' coding style to keep consistent with
existing style.
But based on the disccussion with Greg KH, yesterday, I am now preparing 'check-then-put'
coding style patch.
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/1bed06e5.43da.181a5bac7e5.Coremail.windhl@xxxxxxx/
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/irq.c
>> index 4e1ee70b2a3f..2aeac041bcb9 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/irq.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/irq.c
>> @@ -88,7 +88,11 @@ static const struct of_device_id tegra_ictlr_match[] __initconst = {
>>
>> void __init tegra_init_irq(void)
>> {
>> - if (WARN_ON(!of_find_matching_node(NULL, tegra_ictlr_match)))
>> + struct device_node *np;
>> +
>> + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, tegra_ictlr_match);
>> + of_node_put(np);
>> + if (WARN_ON(!np))
>> pr_warn("Outdated DT detected, suspend/resume will NOT work\n");
>>
>> tegra114_gic_cpu_pm_registration();
>
>Here too.
>
>Regards,
>
>Tony
Thanks again, Tony.
I will send a new 'check-and-put' patch soon.
Liang
