Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Dec 2012 08:37:07 +0100 | From | Alexander Holler <> | Subject | Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH] rtc: recycle id when unloading a rtc driver |
| |
Am 19.12.2012 01:46, schrieb Andrew Morton: > On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:53:25 -0700 > Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@chromium.org> wrote: > >> When calling rtc_device_unregister, we are not freeing the id used by the >> driver. >> So when doing a unload/load cycle for a RTC driver (e.g. rmmod rtc_cmos >> && modprobe rtc_cmos), its id is incremented by one. As a consequence, >> we no longer have neither an rtc0 driver nor a /proc/driver/rtc (as it >> only exists for the first driver). >> >> Signed-off-by: Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@chromium.org> >> --- >> drivers/rtc/class.c | 1 + >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/class.c b/drivers/rtc/class.c >> index dc4c274..37b1d82 100644 >> --- a/drivers/rtc/class.c >> +++ b/drivers/rtc/class.c >> @@ -238,6 +238,7 @@ void rtc_device_unregister(struct rtc_device *rtc) >> rtc_proc_del_device(rtc); >> device_unregister(&rtc->dev); >> rtc->ops = NULL; >> + ida_simple_remove(&rtc_ida, rtc->id); >> mutex_unlock(&rtc->ops_lock); >> put_device(&rtc->dev); >> } > > Now I think about it, this shouldn't have been needed? > > That put_device() should call rtc_device_release(), which does the > ida_simple_remove(). Isn't that working?
It is, see the mini-thread, patch and my comment here:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/6/152
Maybe it would be better to move the ida_simple_remove from the rtc_device_release to rt_device_unregister as I've hinted in the above comment. That would make it easier to spot the ida_simple_remove().
Regards,
Alexander
| |