On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 01:27:16PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 08:11:20AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 08:52:45AM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > > > Using DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE macro with debugfs_create_file_unsafe() > > > function in place of the debugfs_create_file() function will make the > > > file operation struct "reset" aware of the file's lifetime. Additional > > > details here: https://lists.archive.carbon60.com/linux/kernel/2369498 > > > > > > Issue reported by Coccinelle script: > > > scripts/coccinelle/api/debugfs/debugfs_simple_attr.cocci > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <mh12gx2825@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Please Note: This is a Outreachy project task patch. > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > > > index 2d125b8b15ee..f076b1ba7319 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > > > @@ -1551,29 +1551,29 @@ static int amdgpu_debugfs_sclk_set(void *data, u64 val) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > -DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE(fops_ib_preempt, NULL, > > > - amdgpu_debugfs_ib_preempt, "%llu\n"); > > > +DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(fops_ib_preempt, NULL, > > > + amdgpu_debugfs_ib_preempt, "%llu\n"); > > > > Are you sure this is ok? Do these devices need this additional > > "protection"? Do they have the problem that these macros were written > > for? > > > > Same for the other patches you just submitted here, I think you need to > > somehow "prove" that these changes are necessary, checkpatch isn't able > > to determine this all the time. > > Hi Greg, > Based on my understanding, the current function debugfs_create_file() > adds an overhead of lifetime managing proxy for such fop structs. This > should be applicable to these set of drivers as well. Hence I think this > change will be useful. Why do these drivers need these changes? Are these files dynamically removed from the system at random times? There is a reason we didn't just do a global search/replace for this in the kernel when the new functions were added, so I don't know why checkpatch is now saying it must be done. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
