On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:44:36AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:45:27AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:30:02AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > > Oh I see. Damn, missed the devm_kzalloc(). But shouldn't we avoid krealloc() > > > on devm_kzalloc() in general? krealloc() calls kfree() if the reallocation > > > succeeded and this will break the devres tracking, wouldn't it? > > > > Good point. I will update my test to check for that. > > Well the initial problem still stands, how do we fix the possible double > free? I think I could "just" change the devm_kzalloc() to kzalloc() (and > introduce cleanups) but I'm not sure this is a good solution. The whoule point > of these devm stuff is to apply a safety net, isn't it? No. It's just a convenience because we allocate so much stuff on probe. A few people use it like that, where they try to manage their own memory and use devm_ at the same time and it annoys me. Just use kzalloc(). But make sure there is a free somewhere. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html