On 01/31/2013 01:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Stephen Warren wrote:

quoted

On 01/30/2013 12:40 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:

quoted

From: Lee Jones <redacted>

Current failure path neglects to mutex_destroy() before returning
an error due to an invalid parameter or an error received from
gpiochip_add(). This patch aims to remedy that behaviour.

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-abx500.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-abx500.c

quoted

@@ -1155,11 +1155,13 @@ static int abx500_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	default:
 		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unsupported pinctrl sub driver (%d)\n",
 				(int) platid->driver_data);
+		mutex_destroy(&pct->lock);
 		return -EINVAL;

Especially given there's already a label out_free which performs this
mutex_destroy(), those last two lines would be better as:

ret = -EINVAL;
goto out_free;

Yes, that's one way of doing it. I figured it was 6 of one and half a
dozen of the other to be honest.

Either I:

 +           mutex_destroy(&pct->lock);

Or:

 +           ret = -EINVAL; 
 +           goto out_free;
 -           return -EINVAL;

I figured the smallest diff would be best. To be honest, I'm not
bothered either way. If it offends you, I can do it the other way, no
problem. Just let me know quick, so I can get the fixed up patch to
Linus.

NB: There is no 'out_free:' at this point, it has already been
removed.

Where has it been removed? Both the latest linux-next and LinusW's
pinctrl tree on git.kernel.org still contain it...

The style in that code is clearly "goto foo" for error-handling, and
makes for smaller simpler code, so I don't see why the label would be
removed.

Still, this review is just a suggestion; this driver isn't anything I
have any ownership of, so I guess feel free to go either way.