lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [extcon]:remove freed groups caused the panic or warning in unregister flow
On 11/04/2013 11:07 AM, Wang, Xiaoming wrote:
> Dear Choi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chanwoo Choi [mailto:cw00.choi@samsung.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 9:43 AM
> To: Wang, Xiaoming
> Cc: myungjoo.ham@samsung.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Liu, Chuansheng; Zhang, Dongxing
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [extcon]:remove freed groups caused the panic or warning in unregister flow
>
> Hi Wang,
>
>> drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>> b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c index 148382f..48f4669 100644
>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>> @@ -794,6 +794,8 @@ void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev *edev)
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> + device_unregister(edev->dev);
>> +
>> if (edev->mutually_exclusive && edev->max_supported) {
>> for (index = 0; edev->mutually_exclusive[index];
>> index++)
>> @@ -814,7 +816,6 @@ void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev *edev)
>> if (switch_class)
>> class_compat_remove_link(switch_class, edev->dev, NULL); #endif
>> - device_unregister(edev->dev);
>> put_device(edev->dev);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(extcon_dev_unregister);
>>
>
> I think we could only apply following patch instead of moving the position of device_unregister().
>
> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c index 148382f..ff27b19 100644
> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
> @@ -805,10 +805,8 @@ void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev *edev)
> for (index = 0; index < edev->max_supported; index++)
> kfree(edev->cables[index].attr_g.name);
>
> - if (edev->max_supported) {
> - kfree(edev->extcon_dev_type.groups);
> + if (edev->max_supported)
> kfree(edev->cables);
> - }
>
> #if defined(CONFIG_ANDROID)
> if (switch_class)
>
> Thanks,
> Chanwoo Choi
>
> I don't agree with you.
> Why do not you want moving the position of device_unregister()?
> It will cause the memory leak if has not kfree edev->extcon_dev_type.groups as your patch do firstly. And if you think kfree edev->extcon_dev_type.groups is meaningless well then kfree edev->extcon_dev_type.groups in function exton_dev_register (line 756)also should be removed I think. What do you think?
>

As you comment, my opinion has memory leak problem. My mistake.
But, I prefer to call 'device_unregister' at the end of extcon_dev_unregister().
To resolve kernel panic, I think we could use 'devm_kzalloc' instead of kzalloc/kfree.
What is your opinion about my approach?

Thanks,
Chanwoo Choi




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-11-04 03:41    [W:0.091 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site