Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Sep 2023 22:14:18 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] HID: nvidia-shield: Fix the error handling path of shield_probe() | From | Christophe JAILLET <> |
| |
Le 15/09/2023 à 20:16, Rahul Rameshbabu a écrit : > Hi Christophe, > > On Sat, 26 Aug, 2023 19:42:16 +0200 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of >> the probe. >> >> Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 >> patches) >> >> Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. >> >> >> *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in >> thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. >> >> My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are >> allocated, such as: >> led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); >> power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); >> if (ts->haptics_dev) >> input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); >> ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); >> This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the >> changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. >> >> Christophe JAILLET (3): >> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the >> probe error handling path >> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe >> error handling path >> HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() >> >> drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > I was wondering if you have time to address the comments in this > submission. If not, I can re-spin the patches with the needed changes in > upcoming days.
I can send an update tomorrow, but I'm only working with -next, so should using for-6.6/nvidia (as said in your comment in #1/3) be a must have, then it would be more convenient for me if you make the changes by yourself.
CJ
> > -- > Thanks, > > Rahul Rameshbabu >
| |