On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 11:20:12 +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> @@ -763,7 +763,7 @@ static int get_capabilities(struct usbtmc_device_data *data)
> 0, 0, buffer, 0x18, USBTMC_TIMEOUT);
> if (rv < 0) {
> dev_err(dev, "usb_control_msg returned %d\n", rv);
> - return rv;
> + goto err_out;
> }
>
> dev_dbg(dev, "GET_CAPABILITIES returned %x\n", buffer[0]);
> @@ -773,7 +773,8 @@ static int get_capabilities(struct usbtmc_device_data *data)
> dev_dbg(dev, "USB488 device capabilities are %x\n", buffer[15]);
> if (buffer[0] != USBTMC_STATUS_SUCCESS) {
> dev_err(dev, "GET_CAPABILITIES returned %x\n", buffer[0]);
> - return -EPERM;
> + rv = -EPERM;
> + goto err_out;
> }
>
> data->capabilities.interface_capabilities = buffer[4];
> @@ -781,6 +782,7 @@ static int get_capabilities(struct usbtmc_device_data *data)
> data->capabilities.usb488_interface_capabilities = buffer[14];
> data->capabilities.usb488_device_capabilities = buffer[15];
>
> +err_out:
> kfree(buffer);
> return 0;
Shouldn't that be changed to "return rv;" here then?
--
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@xxxxxxx
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
