Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:42:16 +0100 | From | Levente Kurusa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 21/38] workqueue: add missing put_device call |
| |
[+Cc Greg]
On 12/19/2013 04:34 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Levente Kurusa <levex@linux.com> wrote: >> The reason I removed the kfree() was because the put_device() will decrement >> wq_dev->dev's reference count to zero (it is set to one by device_register) and hence the >> wq_device_release() will be called. Now, this effectively does the same the kfree() call >> would have done but also driver core is notified. > > Yeah, I know it does the same thing. It's just not the right way to do it. > >> Also, if you take a look at the comment for the device_register() function, it explicitly >> says NOT to kfree the struct device, but instead call put_device() and let the device's release() >> function take care. > > Greg, the API as described by the comment is really weird and > unconventional. Failed calls are not supposed to have side effects > which require explicit cleanup. Can we please update the comment? >
Yes, it was already discussed that it would be more sane to have device_register() call put_device() if it would fail, but Greg said that the API was designed so that no kfree()s happen in the core.
-- Regards, Levente Kurusa
| |