From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: walter harms Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 08:09:42 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/unicore32/kernel/dma.c: eliminated unneeded free_irq Message-Id: <4F61A3C6.8000607@bfs.de> List-Id: References: <1331798498-13606-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> In-Reply-To: <1331798498-13606-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Julia Lawall Cc: Guan Xuetao , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 15.03.2012 09:01, schrieb Julia Lawall: > From: Julia Lawall > > The device remains functional if the second request_irq fails, so the first > one should not be freed. > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall > > --- > diff --git a/arch/unicore32/kernel/dma.c b/arch/unicore32/kernel/dma.c > index ae441bc..6184ff2 100644 > --- a/arch/unicore32/kernel/dma.c > +++ b/arch/unicore32/kernel/dma.c > @@ -172,8 +172,9 @@ int __init puv3_init_dma(void) > > ret = request_irq(IRQ_DMAERR, dma_err_handler, 0, "DMAERR", NULL); > if (ret) { > + /* the device remains function if this fails, so don't free > + the previously allocated irq */ > printk(KERN_CRIT "Can't register IRQ for DMAERR\n"); > - free_irq(IRQ_DMA, "DMA"); > return ret; > } > obviously we had the same idea ... i did not see that her it came in the moment i send my reply sorry for the noise, re, wh