Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] Revert "spi/doc: spi_master_put must be followed up by kfree"

On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 03:22:43AM +0300, Alexey Klimov wrote: > Sorry. Right now I see how I screwed up. Should I re-send it as single > patch with all info included (marking as RESEND)? No, it's OK - the patch itself was clear enough and I already applied it. signature.asc Description: Digita

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] Revert "spi/doc: spi_master_put must be followed up by kfree"

On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 01:47:21AM +0300, Alexey Klimov wrote: > >> During review of new SPI drivers I tried to understand connection >> between comment "calling spi_master_put() and kfree() to prevent a >> memory leak" for spi_alloc_master() in

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] Revert "spi/doc: spi_master_put must be followed up by kfree"

On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 01:47:21AM +0300, Alexey Klimov wrote: > During review of new SPI drivers I tried to understand connection > between comment "calling spi_master_put() and kfree() to prevent a > memory leak" for spi_alloc_master() in spi.c and why no driver calls > kfree() on error path. Lo

[PATCH RESEND 0/1] Revert "spi/doc: spi_master_put must be followed up by kfree"

Hi all, During review of new SPI drivers I tried to understand connection between comment "calling spi_master_put() and kfree() to prevent a memory leak" for spi_alloc_master() in spi.c and why no driver calls kfree() on error path. Looks like Uwe added this comment and later I found patch from Gu