[PATCH] ARM:common: setting saved_state to NULL after kfree

[PATCH] ARM:common: setting saved_state to NULL after kfree

[Chen Gang]

  need set NULL before return, just like function sa1111_remove has done.
  and better to use sa1111_remove directly, instead of current implementation.


Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
---
 arch/arm/common/sa1111.c |    4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c b/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c
index e57d7e5..4bb8230 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c
@@ -954,9 +954,7 @@ static int sa1111_resume(struct platform_device *dev)
 	 */
 	id = sa1111_readl(sachip->base + SA1111_SKID);
 	if ((id & SKID_ID_MASK) != SKID_SA1111_ID) {
-		__sa1111_remove(sachip);
-		platform_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
-		kfree(save);
+		sa1111_remove(dev);
 		return 0;
 	}
 
-- 
1.7.10.4

[PATCH] ARM:common: setting saved_state to NULL after kfree

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:11:43PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>   need set NULL before return, just like function sa1111_remove has done.
>   and better to use sa1111_remove directly, instead of current implementation.

NAK.

1. __sa1111_remove() will kfree sachip, so the value of sachip->saved_state
   at this point is meaningless.
2. I don't think you tried to build with your patch in place.

[PATCH] ARM:common: setting saved_state to NULL after kfree

[Chen Gang]

? 2013?01?29? 19:15, Russell King - ARM Linux ??:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:11:43PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> >   need set NULL before return, just like function sa1111_remove has done.
>> >   and better to use sa1111_remove directly, instead of current implementation.
> NAK.
> 
> 1. __sa1111_remove() will kfree sachip, so the value of sachip->saved_state
>    at this point is meaningless.

  yes, just like what you said. it is not a bug
    (it seems not necessary to set saved_state to NULL in sa1111_remove, either).

  I think, this patch can make the source code simpler and clearer.
  so I still suggest to apply it (although it seems a minor patch).


> 2. I don't think you tried to build with your patch in place.
> 
> 
  it is my fault, just like what you said, I did not try to build.
  and I should try now.

  thanks.

-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation

[PATCH] ARM:common: setting saved_state to NULL after kfree

[Chen Gang]

  it is my fault, building failed for not declare sa1111_remove before using.
  I should notice next time (at least, need building).

  if sending patch v2 is welcome, I will do.
    if need additional test, I should try (I try under qemu virtual machine).

  :-)


gchen.


? 2013?01?29? 19:34, Chen Gang ??:
>> > 2. I don't think you tried to build with your patch in place.
>> > 
>> > 
>   it is my fault, just like what you said, I did not try to build.
>   and I should try now.


-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation