[PATCH] cptm1217: check if interrupts are masked at probe

sanjeev sharma sanjeevsharmaengg at gmail.com
Mon Jan 5 06:21:00 UTC 2015


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:41 AM, devendra.aaru <devendra.aaru at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:04 AM, sanjeev sharma
> <sanjeevsharmaengg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> the function cp_tm1217_mask_interrupt can return failure.
>>> added the check and the failure path.
>>>
>>> Cc: Ramesh Agarwal <ramesh.agarwal at intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Devendra Naga <devendra.aaru at gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  build tested only on x86_64. config is allmodconfig.
>>>
>>>  drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c | 6 ++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c b/drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c
>>> index 7f265ce..54e5953 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c
>>> @@ -446,6 +446,12 @@ static int cp_tm1217_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>>
>>>         /* Mask all the interrupts */
>>>         retval = cp_tm1217_mask_interrupt(ts);
>>> +       if (retval) {
>>> +               dev_err(ts->dev, "failed to mask interrupts, error: %d\n",
>>> +                       retval);
>>> +               kfree(ts);
>>
>> Here you are doing more than what you have specified in change-log.How
>> did you find out memory leak ? Did you used any facility like kmemleak
>> facility to find this
>> problem ?
>
> No i am not doing more than one change. Read the change log one more time.

you are addressing the memory leak which is not mentioned in change-log.


More information about the devel mailing list