Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:55:52 +0900 | From | Chanwoo Choi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] extcon: driver model release call not needed |
| |
On 10/21/2012 01:46 PM, anish kumar wrote: > From: anish kumar <anish198519851985@gmail.com> > > There was a case where free and list_del can be called twice > on the same pointer.So fixed it by re-arranging the code and > removing a function which was not needed. > > Signed-off-by: anish kumar <anish198519851985@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > Applied, thanks,
But, There were some minor issue, so I fix and applied it.
[...]
> static void extcon_dev_release(struct device *dev) > { > - struct extcon_dev *edev = (struct extcon_dev *) dev_get_drvdata(dev); > - > - extcon_cleanup(edev, true); > + struct extcon_dev *edev = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > + kfree(edev->dev); It is not necessary to get extcon_dev instance through dev_get_drvdata() and only call kfree(dev) by using extcon_dev_release()'s parameter.
kfree(dev);
> } > > static const char *muex_name = "mutually_exclusive"; > @@ -810,7 +773,35 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(extcon_dev_register); > */ > void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev *edev) > { > - extcon_cleanup(edev, false); > + mutex_lock(&extcon_dev_list_lock); > + list_del(&edev->entry); > + mutex_unlock(&extcon_dev_list_lock); > + > + if (get_device(edev->dev) != NULL) {
I prefer minimal indentation, so I will modify as below code.
int index;
mutex_lock(&extcon_dev_list_lock); list_del(&edev->entry); mutex_unlock(&extcon_dev_list_lock);
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(get_device(edev->dev))) { dev_err(edev->dev, "Failed to unregister extcon_dev (%s)\n", dev_name(edev->dev)); return; }
if (edev->mutually_exclusive && edev->max_supported) { for (index = 0; edev->mutually_exclusive[index]; index++) kfree(edev->d_attrs_muex[index].attr.name); kfree(edev->d_attrs_muex); kfree(edev->attrs_muex); }
[...]
Cheers, Chanwoo Choi
| |