i have just noticed: The function already exits
194 static void exynos_drm_postclose(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file) 195 { 196 if (!file->driver_priv) 197 return; 198 199 kfree(file->driver_priv); 200 file->driver_priv = NULL; 201 }
Am 21.01.2014 13:37, schrieb walter harms:
Am 21.01.2014 07:57, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
If exynos_drm_subdrv_open() fails then we re-use "file_priv".
Fixes: 96f5421523df ('drm/exynos: use a new anon file for exynos gem mmaper') Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter dan.carpenter@oracle.com
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c index 9d096a0c5f8d..3c845292845a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c @@ -174,6 +174,7 @@ static int exynos_drm_open(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file) if (ret) { kfree(file_priv); file->driver_priv = NULL;
}return ret;
using kfree( file->driver_priv ); file->driver_priv = NULL;
would be less confusing to read, and give checkers a better chance to spot mistakes. (btw: file_priv could be removed from this function completely).
just my 2 cents, re, wh
anon_filp = anon_inode_getfile("exynos_gem", &exynos_drm_gem_fops, @@ -186,7 +187,7 @@ static int exynos_drm_open(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file) anon_filp->f_mode = FMODE_READ | FMODE_WRITE; file_priv->anon_filp = anon_filp;
- return ret;
- return 0;
}
static void exynos_drm_preclose(struct drm_device *dev,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html