[JFFS2] Fix memory leak in scan code; improve comments.

If we had to allocate extra space for the summary node, we weren't
correctly freeing it when jffs2_sum_scan_sumnode() returned nonzero --
which is both the success and the failure case. Only when it returned
zero, which means fall through to the full scan, were we correctly freeing
the buffer.

Document the meaning of those return codes while we're at it.

Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>

diff --git a/fs/jffs2/scan.c b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
index 06637050749d602c3de0d39a8aac0404a684771c..192b0bd2118062056eac905b2a402de7538ad07b 100644 (file)
--- a/fs/jffs2/scan.c
+++ b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
@@ -516,10 +516,15 @@ static int jffs2_scan_eraseblock (struct jffs2_sb_info *c, struct jffs2_eraseblo
 
                if (sumptr) {
                        err = jffs2_sum_scan_sumnode(c, jeb, sumptr, sumlen, &pseudo_random);
-                       if (err)
-                               return err;
+
                        if (buf_size && sumlen > buf_size)
                                kfree(sumptr);
+                       /* If it returns with a real error, bail. 
+                          If it returns positive, that's a block classification
+                          (i.e. BLK_STATE_xxx) so return that too.
+                          If it returns zero, fall through to full scan. */
+                       if (err)
+                               return err;
                }
        }