On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 18:20:33 -0500
Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> mdev_remove_sysfs_files() should follow exact mirror sequence of a
> create, similar to what is followed in error unwinding path of
> mdev_create_sysfs_files().
>
> Fixes: 7b96953bc640 ("vfio: Mediated device Core driver")
> Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
> index ce5dd21..c782fa9 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ int mdev_create_sysfs_files(struct device *dev, struct mdev_type *type)
>
> void mdev_remove_sysfs_files(struct device *dev, struct mdev_type *type)
> {
> + sysfs_remove_files(&dev->kobj, mdev_device_attrs);
> sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "mdev_type");
> sysfs_remove_link(type->devices_kobj, dev_name(dev));
> - sysfs_remove_files(&dev->kobj, mdev_device_attrs);
> }
Ok, I agree this is good practice, but what qualifies a "Fixes:" tag
here? The fixes reference is incorrect in any case, 6a62c1dfb5c7
changed the creation ordering and didn't update the remove ordering to
match, but I still don't see an actual problem with the remove ordering
that necessitates the tag. Please clarify. Thanks,
Alex
