Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c

On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 04:18:10PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Re the leaks, in probe() request_irq() isn't cleaned up ... but it
> looked to me like the rest of the allocations did get cleaned up
> afer probe() errors.  But remove() does indeed leak the memory you
> highlighted.

Why not make ep0_buf a 16bit field in that struct?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c
    • From: David Brownell <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c
    • From: David Brownell <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c
    • From: David Brownell <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Oops... not sure why.
• Next by Date: Re: Patches for REALLY TINY 386 kernels
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] minimal fixes for drivers/usb/gadget/m66592-udc.c
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]