On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 09:32:18PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:

> I think the reason of our misunderstanding is due to the name of
> input_free_device call. From the code, it is device destroy function,
> and the freeing itself done as an error handling of
> input_register_device
> (http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/input/input.c#L2114).

> How do you think we need to proceed? Do I need to send patches with
> explicit call to input_free_device function?

I really think the input API needs to be looked at here, this is all way
too error prone.  Calling input_free_device() on something allocated
using devm_ looks like an error itself...