On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:21:09PM +0300, Matan Barak wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
> <jgunthorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 05:59:05PM +0200, Matan Barak wrote:
> >> +static struct ib_uverbs_completion_event_file *
> >> +ib_uverbs_lookup_comp_file(int fd, struct ib_ucontext *context)
> >> +{
> >> + struct ib_uobject *uobj = uobj_get_read(uobj_get_type(comp_channel),
> >> + fd, context);
> >> + struct ib_uobject_file *uobj_file;
> >> +
> >> + if (IS_ERR(uobj))
> >> + return (void *)uobj;
> >> +
> >> + uobj_file = container_of(uobj, struct ib_uobject_file, uobj);
> >> +
> >> + uverbs_uobject_get(&uobj_file->uobj);
> >> + uobj_put_read(uobj);
> >
> > That looks odd, isn't uobj == uobj_file->uobj ?
>
> Yeah, they're essentially the same. The uverbs_uobject_get is intended
> to increase the reference count
> on the returned object. The uobj_put_read is paired with uobj_get_read
> (first line of this function).
> We could change them both to uobj.
I'm confused why you would ever write
uverbs_uobject_get(uobj);
uobj_put_read(uobj);
Maybe drop both lines and just add a comment that the ref from
uobj_get_read moves from the stack to XX
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
