Hi!
> > Wow, that function is fragile. It returns 0/1/-EINVAL, while being
> > documented for 0/1...
>
> Oh, it generally should return 1 for !psd.
>
> > Patch does not look obviously wrong, but maybe
> >
> > @@ -73,13 +73,17 @@ int dev_pm_put_subsys_data(struct device *dev)
> >
> > if (--psd->refcount == 0) {
> > dev->power.subsys_data = NULL;
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> > - kfree(psd);
> > - ret = 1;
> > + return 1;
> > }
> >
> > Would be cleaner.
>
> What about this:
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
