Re: [PATCH][trivial] pcmcia: avoid static analysis complaint about use-after-free

2013-01-20 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, Jesper Juhl wrote: > Coverity complains about a use after free for 'res1' and 'res2' since > we use the value of the pointers in a 'dev_dbg()' after they have been > freed. That's not really a problem, but it still seems cleaner to > defer freeing until we are completely done

[PATCH][trivial] pcmcia: avoid static analysis complaint about use-after-free

2013-01-20 Thread Jesper Juhl
Coverity complains about a use after free for 'res1' and 'res2' since we use the value of the pointers in a 'dev_dbg()' after they have been freed. That's not really a problem, but it still seems cleaner to defer freeing until we are completely done with the pointers. Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl

[PATCH][trivial] pcmcia: avoid static analysis complaint about use-after-free

2013-01-20 Thread Jesper Juhl
Coverity complains about a use after free for 'res1' and 'res2' since we use the value of the pointers in a 'dev_dbg()' after they have been freed. That's not really a problem, but it still seems cleaner to defer freeing until we are completely done with the pointers. Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl

Re: [PATCH][trivial] pcmcia: avoid static analysis complaint about use-after-free

2013-01-20 Thread Jiri Kosina
On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, Jesper Juhl wrote: Coverity complains about a use after free for 'res1' and 'res2' since we use the value of the pointers in a 'dev_dbg()' after they have been freed. That's not really a problem, but it still seems cleaner to defer freeing until we are completely done