Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> The failed_get label is used after the call to clk_get has succeeded, so it should be moved up above the call to clk_put. The failed_req labels doesn’t do anything different than failed_get, so delete it. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // …
Catégorie : Linux
Jun 01 2011
drivers/video/pxa168fb.c: add missing clk_put
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> Add a label for error-handling code in the case where only clk_get has succeeded. Rename the label failed to be consistent with the rest. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds the missing clk_put is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ expression e1,e2; statement S; @@ e1 = clk_get@p1(…); …
Jun 01 2011
drivers/video/imxfb.c: add missing clk_put
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> Reorder the labels at the end of the function to correspond to the order in which the resources are allocated. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ expression e1,e2; statement S; @@ e1 = clk_get@p1(…); … when != e1 = …
Jun 01 2011
drivers/usb/host/ohci-pxa27x.c: add missing clk_put
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> Add a label before the call to clk_put and jump to that in the error handling code that occurs after the call to clk_get has succeeded. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ expression e1,e2; statement S; @@ e1 = …
Jun 01 2011
ASoC: add missing clk_put to nuc900-ac97
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> This goto is after the call to clk_get, so it should go to the label that includes a call to clk_put. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ expression e1,e2; statement S; @@ e1 = clk_get@p1(…); … when != e1 …
Jun 01 2011
drivers/net/davinci_emac.c: add missing clk_put
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> Go to existing error handling code at the end of the function that calls clk_put. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ expression e1,e2; statement S; @@ e1 = clk_get@p1(…); … when != e1 = e2 when != clk_put(e1) when …
May 27 2011
drivers/char/ppdev.c: put gotten port value
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> parport_find_number() calls parport_get_port() on its result, so there should be a corresponding call to parport_put_port() before dropping the reference. Similar code is found in the function register_device() in the same file. The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @exists@ local idexpression struct parport * x; expression …
May 27 2011
drivers/rtc/rtc-mrst.c: use release_mem_region after request_mem_region
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> The memory allocated using request_mem_region should be released using release_mem_region, not release_region. The semantic patch that fixes part of this problem is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @@ expression E1,E2,E3; @@ request_mem_region(E1,E2,E3) … ?- release_region(E1,E2) + release_mem_region(E1,E2) // [akpm@linux-foundation.org: use resource_size()] Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Cc: Alessandro Zummo Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus …
May 20 2011
[media] imon: Correct call to input_free_device
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> ictx->touch is intialied in imon_init_intf1, to the result of calling the function that contains this code. Thus, in this code, input_free_device should be called on touch itself. A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @r exists@ local idexpression struct input_dev * x; expression ra,rr; …
May 18 2011
drivers/staging/cptm1217/clearpad_tm1217.c: Correct call to input_free_device
Author: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> This code is in a loop that currently is only executed once. Because of this property, the first block of code is currently actually correct. Nevertheless, the comments associated with the code suggest that the loop is planned to take more than one iteration in the future, and thus this patch …