From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.digium.com (mail.digium.com [216.207.245.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C28A12C0086 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 13:12:11 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:04:38 -0500 From: Shaun Ruffell To: Xie Shaohui-B21989 Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac/85xx: fix error handle of mpc85xx_mc_err_probe Message-ID: <20120919030438.GE24873@digium.com> References: <1347533729-5893-1-git-send-email-Shaohui.Xie@freescale.com> <20120914182137.GD18672@digium.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: "avorontsov@mvista.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:32:59AM +0000, Xie Shaohui-B21989 wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Shaun Ruffell [mailto:sruffell@digium.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 2:22 AM > > To: Xie Shaohui-B21989 > > Cc: linux-edac@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > > akpm@linux-foundation.org; avorontsov@mvista.com; linux- > > kernel@vger.kernel.org; grant.likely@secretlab.ca > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac/85xx: fix error handle of mpc85xx_mc_err_probe > > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 06:55:29PM +0800, Shaohui Xie wrote: > > > Error handle in case of DDR ECC off is wrong, sysfs entries > > > have not been created, so edac_mc_free which frees a mci > > > instance should not be called. > > > Also, free mci's memory in this case. > > > > Jus FYI: I ran into the same error in edac_mc_free() which I > > resolved in a slightly different way in some patches I sent > > previously. [1] > > > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/14/475 > > [S.H] Thanks! I did not aware of this patch when one of my > colleague asked me to have a look at the issue, It could save me > some time if I saw this patch earlier. :( > > BTW: seems you are using a different kernel tree with mine. On the chance that I missing something important: Why do you say I was running a different kernel tree? I was against 3.6-rc2 when I original hit the problem.