On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:40:19PM +0200, Belisko Marek wrote:
> Hi Alexey,
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov
> wrote:
> > ft1000dev->tx_urb and ft1000dev->rx_urb are not deallocated
> > if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
> > check for success of
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:40:19PM +0200, Belisko Marek wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov
khoroshi...@ispras.ru wrote:
ft1000dev-tx_urb and ft1000dev-rx_urb are not deallocated
if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
check for
Hi Alexey,
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov
wrote:
> ft1000dev->tx_urb and ft1000dev->rx_urb are not deallocated
> if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
> check for success of urb allocation. The patch fixes the both issues.
>
> By the way, there is no
ft1000dev->tx_urb and ft1000dev->rx_urb are not deallocated
if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
check for success of urb allocation. The patch fixes the both issues.
By the way, there is no sense in GFP_ATOMIC for urb allocation here,
so it is changed to GFP_KERNEL.
Found
ft1000dev-tx_urb and ft1000dev-rx_urb are not deallocated
if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
check for success of urb allocation. The patch fixes the both issues.
By the way, there is no sense in GFP_ATOMIC for urb allocation here,
so it is changed to GFP_KERNEL.
Found
Hi Alexey,
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Alexey Khoroshilov
khoroshi...@ispras.ru wrote:
ft1000dev-tx_urb and ft1000dev-rx_urb are not deallocated
if something goes wrong in ft1000_probe(). Also there is no
check for success of urb allocation. The patch fixes the both issues.
By the way,
6 matches
Mail list logo