i have just noticed: The function already exits
194 static void exynos_drm_postclose(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file
*file)
195 {
196 if (!file->driver_priv)
197 return;
198
199 kfree(file->driver_priv);
200 file->driver_priv = NULL;
201 }
Am 21.01.2014 13:37, schrieb walter harms:
>
>
> Am 21.01.2014 07:57, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
>> If exynos_drm_subdrv_open() fails then we re-use "file_priv".
>>
>> Fixes: 96f5421523df ('drm/exynos: use a new anon file for exynos gem mmaper')
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>> index 9d096a0c5f8d..3c845292845a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>> @@ -174,6 +174,7 @@ static int exynos_drm_open(struct drm_device *dev,
>> struct drm_file *file)
>> if (ret) {
>> kfree(file_priv);
>> file->driver_priv = NULL;
>> + return ret;
>> }
>
> using
> kfree( file->driver_priv );
> file->driver_priv = NULL;
>
> would be less confusing to read, and give checkers a better chance to spot
> mistakes.
> (btw: file_priv could be removed from this function completely).
>
> just my 2 cents,
> re,
> wh
>
>>
>> anon_filp = anon_inode_getfile("exynos_gem", &exynos_drm_gem_fops,
>> @@ -186,7 +187,7 @@ static int exynos_drm_open(struct drm_device *dev,
>> struct drm_file *file)
>> anon_filp->f_mode = FMODE_READ | FMODE_WRITE;
>> file_priv->anon_filp = anon_filp;
>>
>> - return ret;
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static void exynos_drm_preclose(struct drm_device *dev,
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
