On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:31 AM Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 08:56:25PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 12:39:09 -0800 Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> > > > > +static void bnxt_aux_dev_release(struct device *dev)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct bnxt_aux_dev *bnxt_adev =
> > > > > + container_of(dev, struct bnxt_aux_dev, aux_dev.dev);
> > > > > + struct bnxt *bp = netdev_priv(bnxt_adev->edev->net);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + bnxt_adev->edev->en_ops = NULL;
> > > > > + kfree(bnxt_adev->edev);
> > > >
> > > > And yet the reference counted "release" function accesses the bp->adev
> > > > like it must exist.
> > > >
> > > > This seems odd to me - why do we need refcounting on devices at all
> > > > if we can free them synchronously? To be clear - I'm not sure this is
> > > > wrong, just seems odd.
> > > I followed the existing implementations in that regard. Thanks
> >
> > Leon, could you take a look? Is there no problem in assuming bnxt_adev
> > is still around in the release function?
>
> You caught a real bug. The auxdev idea is very simple - it needs to
> behave like driver core, but in the driver itself.
>
> As such, bnxt_aux_dev_free() shouldn't be called after bnxt_rdma_aux_device_uninit().
> Device will be released through auxiliary_device_uninit();
>
> BTW, line 325 from below shouldn't exist too.
>
> 312 void bnxt_rdma_aux_device_uninit(struct bnxt *bp)
> 313 {
> ...
> 325 if (bnxt_adev->id >= 0)
> 326 ida_free(&bnxt_aux_dev_ids, bnxt_adev->id);
>
> And one line bnxt_aux_dev_alloc() needs to be deleted too.
>
> Thanks
Thanks.
We are reviewing the comments and will have an update soon.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
