> > Either way, the code looks functional to me.
>
> So is that "reviewed-by"?
I was thinking about this hunk:
> @@ -1972,7 +2084,20 @@ int input_register_device(struct input_dev *dev)
>
> mutex_unlock(&input_mutex);
>
> + if (dev->devres_managed) {
> + dev_info(dev->dev.parent, "%s: registerign %s with devres.\n",
> + __func__, dev->name ?: "N/A");
> + devres_add(dev->dev.parent, devres);
> + }
> return 0;
> +
> +err_device_del:
> + device_del(&dev->dev);
> +err_free_vals:
> + kfree(dev->vals);
Won't this yield a double free once we reach release()?
> +err_devres_free:
> + devres_free(devres);
> + return error;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(input_register_device);
Thanks,
Henrik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
