From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lixom.net ([66.141.50.11] helo=mail.lixom.net)
	by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux))
	id 1L7CzS-00054f-VC
	for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:55:23 +0000
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 12:08:12 -0600
From: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/mtd/nand/pasemi_nand.c: Add missing pci_dev_put
Message-ID: <20081201180812.GA21646@lixom.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0811271319070.15160@pc-004.diku.dk>
	<20081201174327.GA21274@lixom.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0812011838440.11341@pc-004.diku.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812011838440.11341@pc-004.diku.dk>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
	<mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
	<mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 06:39:01PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Olof Johansson wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 01:19:49PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> > > 
> > > pci_get_device increments a reference count that should be decremented
> > > using pci_dev_put.  I have thus added an extra label in the error handling
> > > code to do this.  I don't know, however, whether there should be a
> > > pci_dev_put before the return 0 as well.
> > > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
> 
> Do you know the answer about the return 0?

Teaches me to read the patch description twice.

Either there or in pasemi_nand_remove(), doesn't matter much to me. Doing
it before the return 0 is the smaller change.


-Olof