lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] da9052-battery: don't free IRQ that wasn't requested


Am 05.09.2012 14:34, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> We should decrement "i" before doing the free_irq(). If we call this
> because request_threaded_irq() failed then we don't want to free the
> thing which failed. Or in the case where we get here because
> power_supply_register() failed then the original codes does a read past
> the end of the array.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/power/da9052-battery.c b/drivers/power/da9052-battery.c
> index 20b86ed..d9d034d 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/da9052-battery.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/da9052-battery.c
> @@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static s32 __devinit da9052_bat_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return 0;
>
> err:
> - for (; i >= 0; i--) {
> + while (--i >= 0) {
> irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, da9052_bat_irqs[i]);
> free_irq(bat->da9052->irq_base + irq, bat);
> }

hi da,
(my usual nitpicking ...)
since a lot of people do make mistakes on count-down-loops, is there any chance to
make this a common count-up-for()-loop ?
like:
for (j=0; j <= i ;j++ ) {
irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, da9052_bat_irqs[j]);
free_irq(bat->da9052->irq_base + irq, bat);
}

re,
wh


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-05 16:43    [W:0.042 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site