Messages in this thread | | | From | Jingoo Han <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/11] mfd: menelaus: use devm_request_irq() and devm_kzalloc() | Date | Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:17:30 +0900 |
| |
On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 5:10 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 05:05:10PM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:31 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > Hi Jongoo, > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:12:38PM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: > > > > Use devm_request_irq() and devm_kzalloc() to make cleanup paths > > > > more simple. > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > @@ -1269,9 +1266,7 @@ static int __exit menelaus_remove(struct i2c_client *client) > > > > { > > > > struct menelaus_chip *menelaus = i2c_get_clientdata(client); > > > > > > > > - free_irq(client->irq, menelaus); > > > > flush_work(&menelaus->work); > > > > - kfree(menelaus); > > > > the_menelaus = NULL; > > > > return 0; > > > > > > This conversion is certainly wrong - you really want to disable IRQ and > > > then wait for the scheduled work to finish before freeing memory. Here > > > you flush work but nothing stops IRQ from firing and scheduling that > > > work again. > > > > Yes, you're right. > > I will use devm_free_irq() before flush_work(). > > Why change it at all if you have to call it manually in both error > unwinding and menelaus_remove() cases? > > BTW, that __exit markup on menelaus_remove() is surprising... I am > pretty sure it can be unbound via sysfs and so there will be a nasty > oops.
I see, I will not modify this menelaus mfd driver. Thank you.
> > -- > Dmitry
| |