Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Aug 2014 12:43:31 +0530 | From | Pramod Gurav <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: qcom: Release pin ranges when gpiochip_irqchip_add fails |
| |
On Thursday 28 August 2014 02:54 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Pramod Gurav > <pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com> wrote: >> This patches adds a call to gpiochip_remove_pin_ranges when >> gpiochip_irqchip_add fails to release memory allocated for pin_ranges. >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm.c >> @@ -845,6 +845,7 @@ static int msm_gpio_init(struct msm_pinctrl *pctrl) >> IRQ_TYPE_NONE); >> if (ret) { >> dev_err(pctrl->dev, "Failed to add irqchip to gpiochip\n"); >> + gpiochip_remove_pin_ranges(chip); >> return -ENOSYS; >> } > > Good catch, I guess this was lost in the introduction of gpiochip_irqchip... > > > Rather than just releasing the pin_ranges of the gpio_chip you should > probably add a gpiochip_remove() both here and in the case of > gpiochip_add_pin_range() failing.
Thanks for review. But if I see implementation of gpiochip_remove() it does: gpiochip_irqchip_remove(chip); gpiochip_remove_pin_ranges(chip); of_gpiochip_remove(chip);
In above failure case only gpiochip_add() and gpiochip_add_pin_range() have been successful hence I thought that would cause any problem to add gpiochip_remove(). If that is not a problem I think we can call gpiochip_remove() in fail case of gpiochip_add_pin_range() as well. Do I make sense?
> > Regards, > Bjorn > -- > 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/ >
| |