lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ipack: add missing put_device() after device_register() failed
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:03:15AM +0100, Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez wrote:
> put_device() must be called after device_register() fails,
> since device_register() always initializes the refcount
> on the device structure to one.
>
> dev->id is free'd inside of ipack_device_release function.
> So, it's not needed to do it here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez <siglesias@igalia.com>
> ---
> drivers/ipack/ipack.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ipack/ipack.c b/drivers/ipack/ipack.c
> index 7ec6b20..3588ccf 100644
> --- a/drivers/ipack/ipack.c
> +++ b/drivers/ipack/ipack.c
> @@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ int ipack_device_register(struct ipack_device *dev)
>
> ret = device_register(&dev->dev);
> if (ret < 0)
> - kfree(dev->id);
> + put_device(&dev->dev);

Now callers have no idea if they have to free (put_device) it in case of
failure or it is already done for them, because a few lines earlier, if
pack_device_read_id() fails, it simply returns error code.

IMO if a function did not allocate object it should not try to free it,
callers should dispose of the device as they see fit.

What is missing, however, is dev->id = NULL assignment so that if caller
does put_device() kit won't double-free the memory. Also it would make
sense to split device_register into device_init() and device_add() so
that device_init() is very first thing you do and in case of all
failures callers should use put_device().

Also tpci200.c need to learn to clean up after itself and I also not
sure why it tries to provide its own release function.

Thanks.

--
Dmitry


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-27 00:03    [W:0.096 / U:1.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site