On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Liu Jiang <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed 15 May 2013 02:52:51 AM CST, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Liu Jiang <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue 14 May 2013 11:10:33 PM CST, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Liu Jiang <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/14/2013 04:26 PM, Gu Zheng wrote:
>>>>> I suggest to use pci_release_dev() instead because it also needs
>>>>> to
>>>>> release OF related resources.
>>>>> I will update it in next version.
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>>>>> index bc075a3..2ac6338 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>>>>> @@ -1281,7 +1281,7 @@ static struct pci_dev *pci_scan_device(struct
>>>>> pci_bus
>>>>> *bus
>>>>> pci_set_of_node(dev);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (pci_setup_device(dev)) {
>>>>> - kfree(dev);
>>>>> + pci_release_dev(&dev->dev);
>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> no, should move pci_set_of_node calling into pci_setup_device.
>>>>
>>>> Yinghai
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure whether we should call pci_set_of_node() for SR-IOV devices
>>> too,
>>> any suggestions here?
>>
>>
>> or just move down pci_set_of_node after pci_setup_device?
>>
>> anyway that is another bug.
> I'm not familiar with the OF logic and can't make sure whether
> pci_setup_device()
> has dependency on dev->of_node. Feel it's more safe to call
> pci_release_of_node()
> on failing path instead of tuning call-site of pci_set_of_node().
that is another bug, let of guy handle it.
Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
