On Friday 20 January 2012 03:05 PM, Shubhrajyoti wrote:
> On Friday 20 January 2012 02:19 PM, Govindraj wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>>> The patch does the following
>>>
>>> - The pm_runtime_disable is called in the remove not in the error
>>> case of probe.The
On Friday 20 January 2012 02:19 PM, Govindraj wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>> The patch does the following
>>
>> - The pm_runtime_disable is called in the remove not in the error
>> case of probe.The patch calls the pm_runtime_disable in the error
>> case.
>> -
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
> The patch does the following
>
> - The pm_runtime_disable is called in the remove not in the error
> case of probe.The patch calls the pm_runtime_disable in the error
> case.
> - The up is not freed in the error path. Fix the memory leak
The patch does the following
- The pm_runtime_disable is called in the remove not in the error
case of probe.The patch calls the pm_runtime_disable in the error
case.
- The up is not freed in the error path. Fix the memory leak by calling
kfree in the error path.
- Also the iounmap is not ca