Hi, On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 09:24:38AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 01:39:54PM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 08:42:47PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > This amd5536udc was a complete mess. The major problems that i could > > > find are: > > > > > > 1) if udc_pci_probe() fails in any stage then it just calls the > > > udc_pci_remove() to handle error. And udc_pci_remove() works with > > > struct udc *dev which we get from pci_get_drvdata(pdev). But we do the > > > pci_set_drvdata(pdev, dev) almost at the end of probe. So basically > > > incase of error we are handling the error by dereferencing a NULL > > > pointer. > > > > > > 2) udc_pci_remove() does a BUG_ON(dev->driver != NULL) and dev->driver > > > will be set only if probe is success. So that means if probe fails then > > > probe will call udc_pci_remove() for error handling and udc_pci_remove() > > > will inturn halts the kernel by calling BUG(). > > > > > > And apart from these numerous memory leaks and not releasing of > > > resources. Here comes a rewrite of few of the functions in an > > > attempt to fix these. > > > > run checkpatch.pl and try again > I know checkpatch gives warning on some of my patches but as the warning > was not related to the part I have modified so I have not done any thing > with them as they will become unrelated changes than what is mentioned > in the commit log. > Anyways, I will fix up all the warnings and send v2. But do you want me > to also fix the checkpatch warnings in those patch where functions are > rearranged? Because in those patches functions were just moved and there > was no change in the body of the function. sure, just add a note "while at that, also fix checkpatch warnings" -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
