Hi Dave, On 22-03-21, 16:31, Dave Jiang wrote: > v7: > - Fix up the 'struct device' setup in char device code (Jason) > - Split out the char dev fixes (Jason) > - Split out the DMA dev fixes (Dan) > - Split out the each of the conf_dev fixes > - Split out removal of the pcim_* calls > - Split out removal of the devm_* calls > - Split out the fixes for interrupt config calls > - Reviewed by Dan. > > v6: > - Fix char dev initialization issues (Jason) > - Fix other 'struct device' initialization issues. > > v5: > - Rebased against 5.12-rc dmaengine/fixes > v4: > - fix up the life time of cdev creation/destruction (Jason) > - Tested with KASAN and other memory allocation leak detections. (Jason) > > v3: > - Remove devm_* for irq request and cleanup related bits (Jason) > v2: > - Remove all devm_* alloc for idxd_device (Jason) > - Add kref dep for dma_dev (Jason) > > Vinod, > The series fixes the various 'struct device' lifetime handling in the > idxd driver. The devm managed lifetime is incompatible with 'struct device' > objects that resides in the idxd context. Tested with > CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE and address all issues from that. Sorry for not looking into this earlier.. But I would like to check on the direction idxd is taking. Somehow I get the feel the dmaengine is not the right place for this. Considering that now we have auxdev merged in, should the idxd be spilt into smaller function and no dmaengine parts moved away from dmaengine... I think we do lack a subsystem for all things accelerator in kernel atm... Dan what do you think about splitting idxd? Thanks -- ~Vinod
