Am 01.06.2011 19:10, schrieb Julia Lawall:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Julia Lawall <redacted>
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.
A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@r exists@
expression e1,e2;
statement S;
@@
e1 = clk_get@p1(...);
... when != e1 = e2
when != clk_put(e1)
when any
if (...) { ... when != clk_put(e1)
when != if (...) { ... clk_put(e1) ... }
* return@p3 ...;
} else S
// </smpl>
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <redacted>
---
drivers/net/can/flexcan.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
index d499056..121739c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
@@ -978,8 +978,8 @@ static int __devinit flexcan_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
failed_map:
release_mem_region(mem->start, mem_size);
failed_req:
- clk_put(clk);
failed_get:
+ clk_put(clk);
failed_clock:
return err;
}
So failed_req == failed_get, is that intended ?
re,
wh