On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:40:20AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:24:38AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, I wrote:
You need to free up the memory allocated, and I don't see that
happening here ... The kernel should yell at you ...
WARN(1, KERN_ERR "Device '%s' does not have a release() "
"function, it is broken and must be fixed.\n",
dev_name(dev));
This won't fire unless device_del() is called, right?
Sorry, I should have written, "This won't fire unless
device_unregister() is called, right?" -- though I guess it could be
any call to put_device().
If need be I can add code to cleanly tear down the bus devices and the
associated linked lists and procfs structures, just prior to kernel
termination, as a kernel exitcall. But I don't see this pattern in
use.
When the kernel shuts down, no, the devices are not removed.
But what happens when the bus code is unloaded if it is built as a
module? The devices will be removed then. Or they should be.
This bus driver is not a module.
It can not be built as a module ever?
So please implement the remove device code path,
OK.
just because some other busses are buggy that way does not mean you need
to duplicate their incorrect behavior.
Actually, I think the bug is in porting.txt, when it says "Optionally, the
bus driver may set the device's name and release fields."
Yes, it's not required for a bus, but _someone_ has to set the device
release function. If it's not the bus, it can be the class, or the
device type, otherwise you will trip the warning message in
device_release() when the device finally gets freed.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
