[KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[trem]

Hi

I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
research are good,
I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
returned, and it also
decremented the counter of the device given as "from".

I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :

    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
NULL))) {
                dev->irq = 10;
                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
        pci_dev_put(dev);
        }

    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
                dev->irq = 11;
                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
        pci_dev_put(dev);
        }

So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
twice in the second if.
One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?

thanks,
trem

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2064 bytes --]

On 18.05.2006 [01:16:22 +0200], trem wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
> research are good,
> I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
> returned, and it also
> decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
> 
> I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
> arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
> 
>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> NULL))) {
>                 dev->irq = 10;
>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>         }
> 
>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
>                 dev->irq = 11;
>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>         }
> 
> So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> twice in the second if.
> One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?

/me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
are right.

It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
the first if above and change the second one to

	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
		dev->irq = 11;
		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
		pci_dev_put(dev);
	} else
		pci_dev_put(dev);

In the if case, pci_get_device will call pci_dev_put() on the old
dev before returning the next dev. In the else case, there are no more
devices, so we drop the refcount with an explicit pci_dev_put(). In both
cases, we drop the refcount on the old dev.

Does that seem right?

I, of course, defer to Greg for the "actual" answer :)

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Mark Hollomon]

Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 18.05.2006 [01:16:22 +0200], trem wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
>> research are good,
>> I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
>> returned, and it also
>> decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
>>
>> I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
>> arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
>>
>>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
>> NULL))) {
>>                 dev->irq = 10;
>>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
>>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>>         }
>>
>>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
>>                 dev->irq = 11;
>>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
>>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>>         }
>>
>> So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
>> twice in the second if.
>> One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
> 
> /me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
> pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
> are right.
> 
> It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
> the first if above and change the second one to
> 
> 	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> 		dev->irq = 11;
> 		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> 	} else
> 		pci_dev_put(dev);

That can't be right. you will only reach the else leg if pci_get_device() returns
NULL. which means that you will be calling pci_dev_put(NULL).

-- 
Mark Hollomon
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2233 bytes --]

On 17.05.2006 [21:43:26 -0400], Mark Hollomon wrote:
> Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >On 18.05.2006 [01:16:22 +0200], trem wrote:
> >>Hi
> >>
> >>I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
> >>research are good,
> >>I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
> >>returned, and it also
> >>decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
> >>
> >>I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
> >>arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
> >>
> >>    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >>                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> >>NULL))) {
> >>                dev->irq = 10;
> >>                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
> >>        pci_dev_put(dev);
> >>        }
> >>
> >>    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >>                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, 
> >>                                        dev))) {
> >>                dev->irq = 11;
> >>                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> >>        pci_dev_put(dev);
> >>        }
> >>
> >>So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> >>twice in the second if.
> >>One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
> >
> >/me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
> >pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
> >are right.
> >
> >It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
> >the first if above and change the second one to
> >
> >	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> >		dev->irq = 11;
> >		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> >		pci_dev_put(dev);
> >	} else
> >		pci_dev_put(dev);
> 
> That can't be right. you will only reach the else leg if pci_get_device() 
> returns
> NULL. which means that you will be calling pci_dev_put(NULL).

Gah, true :) Thanks, Mark. I guess you'd need to save the a pointer to
the old_dev.

So much for quick pseudocode.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Matthew Wilcox]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1905 bytes --]

On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 06:20:16PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> > NULL))) {
> >                 dev->irq = 10;
> >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
> >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> >         }
> > 
> >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> >                 dev->irq = 11;
> >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> >         }
> > 
> > So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> > twice in the second if.
> > One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
> 
> /me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
> pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
> are right.
> 
> It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
> the first if above and change the second one to
> 
> 	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> 		dev->irq = 11;
> 		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> 	} else
> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> 
> In the if case, pci_get_device will call pci_dev_put() on the old
> dev before returning the next dev. In the else case, there are no more
> devices, so we drop the refcount with an explicit pci_dev_put(). In both
> cases, we drop the refcount on the old dev.
> 
> Does that seem right?

No.  pci_get_device unconditionally does pci_dev_put().  So if should
just be:

	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
		dev->irq = 11;
		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
		pci_dev_put(dev);
	}


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2523 bytes --]

On 17.05.2006 [20:47:53 -0600], Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 06:20:16PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> > >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> > > NULL))) {
> > >                 dev->irq = 10;
> > >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
> > >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> > >         }
> > > 
> > >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> > >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> > >                 dev->irq = 11;
> > >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> > >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> > >         }
> > > 
> > > So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> > > twice in the second if.
> > > One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
> > 
> > /me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
> > pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
> > are right.
> > 
> > It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
> > the first if above and change the second one to
> > 
> > 	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> > 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> > 		dev->irq = 11;
> > 		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> > 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> > 	} else
> > 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> > 
> > In the if case, pci_get_device will call pci_dev_put() on the old
> > dev before returning the next dev. In the else case, there are no more
> > devices, so we drop the refcount with an explicit pci_dev_put(). In both
> > cases, we drop the refcount on the old dev.
> > 
> > Does that seem right?
> 
> No.  pci_get_device unconditionally does pci_dev_put().  So if should
> just be:
> 
> 	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> 		dev->irq = 11;
> 		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
> 	}

That's what the code has now, right? But we did a pci_dev_put() on the
dev that we're passing to pci_get_device() -- and pci_get_device() will
do an unconditionaly pci_dev_put() again, no?

... <light bulb> ...

Ah, I see what you're saying, sorry. So, yes, take the pci_dev_put() out
of the previous if-clause (the IRQ 10 case) and let pci_get_device()
unconditionally do it?

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Matthew Wilcox]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 246 bytes --]

On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 08:39:32PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Ah, I see what you're saying, sorry. So, yes, take the pci_dev_put() out
> of the previous if-clause (the IRQ 10 case) and let pci_get_device()
> unconditionally do it?

Yes.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Mark Hollomon]

Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 17.05.2006 [21:43:26 -0400], Mark Hollomon wrote:
>> Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>>> On 18.05.2006 [01:16:22 +0200], trem wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
>>>> research are good,
>>>> I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
>>>> returned, and it also
>>>> decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
>>>>
>>>> I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
>>>> arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
>>>>
>>>>    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>>>>                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
>>>> NULL))) {
>>>>                dev->irq = 10;
>>>>                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
>>>>        pci_dev_put(dev);
>>>>        }
>>>>
>>>>    if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>>>>                                        PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, 
>>>>                                        dev))) {
>>>>                dev->irq = 11;
>>>>                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
>>>>        pci_dev_put(dev);
>>>>        }
>>>>
>>>> So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
>>>> twice in the second if.
>>>> One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
>>> /me knows nothing about the PCI space, but looking at the comments for
>>> pci_get_device() and tracing what pci_dev_put() does, it seems like you
>>> are right.
>>>
>>> It seems like the correct method is to remove the pci_dev_put(dev); from
>>> the first if above and change the second one to
>>>
>>> 	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>>> 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
>>> 		dev->irq = 11;
>>> 		pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
>>> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
>>> 	} else
>>> 		pci_dev_put(dev);
>> That can't be right. you will only reach the else leg if pci_get_device() 
>> returns
>> NULL. which means that you will be calling pci_dev_put(NULL).
> 
> Gah, true :) Thanks, Mark. I guess you'd need to save the a pointer to
> the old_dev.

Why? "from" always has its reference count decremented in pci_get_device.
Going back to the original code smippet, I think all that needs to happen
is that the pci_dev_put(dev) needs to be deleted from the first "if" block.

Of course, there seems to be another problem - well nonoptimal behavior. If
the first "if" fails, the code does the exact same search again. The second
"if" could be nested inside the first.

> 
> So much for quick pseudocode.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nish
> 


-- 
Mark Hollomon
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Greg KH]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2439 bytes --]

On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:16:22AM +0200, trem wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
> research are good,
> I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
> returned, and it also
> decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
> 
> I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
> arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
> 
>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> NULL))) {
>                 dev->irq = 10;
>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>         }
> 
>     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
>                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
>                 dev->irq = 11;
>                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
>         pci_dev_put(dev);
>         }
> 
> So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> twice in the second if.
> One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?

Yes, the code is incorrect.  Here's a proper fix for it.  Kumar, feel
free to apply.

-------

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Fix incorrect pci reference counting in 85xx code

As pointed out by trem <tremyfr@yahoo.fr>

Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

---
 arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c |   11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- gregkh-2.6.orig/arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c
+++ gregkh-2.6/arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c
@@ -379,14 +379,13 @@ mpc85xx_cds_pcibios_fixup(void)
                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, NULL))) {
                 dev->irq = 10;
                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
-		pci_dev_put(dev);
-        }
 
-	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
+		if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
-                dev->irq = 11;
-                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
-		pci_dev_put(dev);
+	                dev->irq = 11;
+	                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
+			pci_dev_put(dev);
+		}
         }
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_PCI */

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] question about pci_dev_put

[Greg KH]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2578 bytes --]

On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 10:36:12AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:16:22AM +0200, trem wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I'm looking for information about pci_get_device and pci_dev_put. If my
> > research are good,
> > I've understood that pci_get_device increment the counter of the device
> > returned, and it also
> > decremented the counter of the device given as "from".
> > 
> > I've searched example in the source. I've found this one in
> > arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c(git kernel) :
> > 
> >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
> > NULL))) {
> >                 dev->irq = 10;
> >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
> >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> >         }
> > 
> >     if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> >                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
> >                 dev->irq = 11;
> >                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
> >         pci_dev_put(dev);
> >         }
> > 
> > So, if I don't mistake, this code is buggy, the counter is decremented
> > twice in the second if.
> > One in the pci_get_device and one in pci_dev_put. I'm on the right way ?
> 
> Yes, the code is incorrect.  Here's a proper fix for it.  Kumar, feel
> free to apply.

Oops, that was wrong, here's the correct one, sorry about that:

-------

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Fix incorrect pci reference counting in 85xx code

As pointed out by trem <tremyfr@yahoo.fr>

Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

---
 arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c |    9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- gregkh-2.6.orig/arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c
+++ gregkh-2.6/arch/ppc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_cds_common.c
@@ -379,13 +379,12 @@ mpc85xx_cds_pcibios_fixup(void)
                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, NULL))) {
                 dev->irq = 10;
                 pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 10);
-		pci_dev_put(dev);
-        }
 
-	if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
+		if ((dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
                                         PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2, dev))) {
-                dev->irq = 11;
-                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
+	                dev->irq = 11;
+	                pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, 11);
+		}
 		pci_dev_put(dev);
         }
 }

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors