Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: question about drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c | From | anish kumar <> | Date | Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:50:55 -0800 |
| |
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 17:37 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > The function pm860x_charger_probe in the file > drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c contains the following code: > > count = pdev->num_resources; > for (i = 0, j = 0; i < count; i++) { > info->irq[j] = platform_get_irq(pdev, i); > if (info->irq[j] < 0) > continue; > j++; > } > info->irq_nums = j; > > and then later the following code: > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(info->irq); i++) { This seems to be wrong.We already know this size which is 7 so why use ARRAY_SIZE?I think the intention is as below > ret = request_threaded_irq(info->irq[i], NULL, > pm860x_irq_descs[i].handler, > IRQF_ONESHOT, pm860x_irq_descs[i].name, info); > ... > } > > and finally, in the function pm860x_charger_remove, the code: > > free_irq(info->irq[0], info); > for (i = 0; i < info->irq_nums; i++) > free_irq(info->irq[i], info); > > It looks like the irq_nums field is being used to record how many > platform_get_irq calls were successful, but this information is not used > in the second block of code, where request_threaded_irq is called. So it > would seem that all of the requested irqs should be freed, and not just > the first irq_nums of them. > > The remove code also looks like a double free of info->irq[0]. > > Could I just get rid of the irq_nums field completely? It doesn't seem to diff --git a/drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c b/drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c index 2dbeb14..821629f 100644 --- a/drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c +++ b/drivers/power/88pm860x_charger.c @@ -698,7 +698,7 @@ static __devinit int pm860x_charger_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) pm860x_init_charger(info); - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(info->irq); i++) { + for (i = 0; i < info->irq_nums; i++) { ret = request_threaded_irq(info->irq[i], NULL, pm860x_irq_descs[i].handler, IRQF_ONESHOT, pm860x_irq_descs[i].name, info);
> be used elsewhere. Also, I was planning to use devm_request_threaded_irq, > so then there won't be a need for the explicit frees at all.
> > This file also contains a kfree of devm_kzalloc'd data, which is why I > looked at it in the first place. > > thanks, > julia > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |