For me, it is good :)
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland at amd.com>
wrote:
> This looks good but we should probably do the same for all return paths
> when reference for port has been acquired.
>
> Please see attached patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Harry
>
>
> On 2016-02-01 11:08 AM, Insu Yun wrote:
>
>> In drm_dp_mst_allocate_vcpi, it returns true in two paths,
>> but in one path, there is no reference couting decrease.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Insu Yun <wuninsu at gmail.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
>> index 6ed90a2..fe273b6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
>> @@ -2446,6 +2446,7 @@ bool drm_dp_mst_allocate_vcpi(struct
>> drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, struct drm_dp
>> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("payload: vcpi %d already allocated for pbn
>> %d - requested pbn %d\n", port->vcpi.vcpi, port->vcpi.pbn, pbn);
>> if (pbn == port->vcpi.pbn) {
>> *slots = port->vcpi.num_slots;
>> + drm_dp_put_port(port);
>> return true;
>> }
>> }
>>
>
>
--
Regards
Insu Yun
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20160209/45eefd4d/attachment.html>
