Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:16491 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754416AbaAEAIY (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Jan 2014 19:08:24 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 01:08:04 +0100 From: Samuel Ortiz To: Alexey Khoroshilov Cc: Thierry Escande , Lauro Ramos Venancio , Aloisio Almeida Jr , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfc@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ldv-project@linuxtesting.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFC: port100: fix leak of usb_device Message-ID: <20140105000804.GD6003@zurbaran> (sfid-20140105_010906_064804_66297884) References: <1388866085-11007-1-git-send-email-khoroshilov@ispras.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1388866085-11007-1-git-send-email-khoroshilov@ispras.ru> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Alexey, On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 12:08:05AM +0400, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote: > port100_probe() calls usb_get_dev(), but there is no usb_put_dev() > in port100_disconnect(). The patch adds one. > > Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org). > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Khoroshilov > --- > drivers/nfc/port100.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Patch applied to nfc-next, thanks. I wonder if we really need to refcount the port100 USB interface, but dev->in_urb does reference it for the whole driver life cycle, so I think it all makes sense. Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/