Hi Wei,
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:52:00PM +0800, weiyj...@163.com wrote:
> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_...@trendmicro.com.cn>
>
> Add the missing unlock before return from function
> vpfe_prepare_pipeline() in the error handling case.
>
> video->lock is lock/unlock in function vpfe_open(),
> and no need to unlock it here, so remove unlock
> video->lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_...@trendmicro.com.cn>
> ---
> drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c
> b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c
> index 3ec7e65..db49af9 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static int vpfe_prepare_pipeline(struct vpfe_video_device
> *video)
> mutex_lock(&mdev->graph_mutex);
> ret = media_entity_graph_walk_init(&graph, entity->graph_obj.mdev);
> if (ret) {
> - mutex_unlock(&video->lock);
> + mutex_unlock(&mdev->graph_mutex);
Oh dear. I wonder how could this have happened... thanks for the fix!
I've applied this to my tree.
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
> media_entity_graph_walk_start(&graph, entity);
>
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ai...@iki.fi XMPP: sai...@retiisi.org.uk
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
