On December 5, 2014 7:50:18 AM PST, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Friday 05 December 2014 07:01:17 Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>
>> On December 5, 2014 2:33:11 AM PST, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>> >On Thursday 04 December 2014 04:23:44 vishnupatekar wrote:
>> >> +
>> >> +struct sunxips2data {
>> >> + int irq;
>> >> + spinlock_t ps2_lock;
>> >> + void __iomem *base_address; /* virt address of control
>registers*/
>> >> + struct serio *serio; /* serio*/
>> >> + struct device *dev;
>> >> + struct clk *pclk;
>> >> +};
>> >
>> >As this is dynamically allocated, better embed the serio member
>> >directly to avoid allocating both separately.
>>
>> That would be wrong - serio is refcounted and it may outlive instance
>of sunxips2data you embedded it into.
>
>Ok, I see. I guess in this case the use of devm_kzalloc for serio is a
>bug,
>because that would lead to a double free upon module unload, right?
>
Exactly. I already mentioned that in my review.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
