Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1285121
| From | Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: gigaset: freeing an active object |
| Date | 2015-12-07 10:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qD0hj-2Dk-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <qAB3I-739-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qBpjQ-5xC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qCHHH-7vV-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qCJzQ-fR-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <qCNWO-3cn-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
Am 06.12.2015 um 21:12 schrieb Paul Bolle:
> On zo, 2015-12-06 at 16:29 +0100, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>> So the solution might be as simple as moving the kfree() call from
>> gigaset_freecshw() to gigaset_device_release(). Something like this:
>>
>> --- a/drivers/isdn/gigaset/ser-gigaset.c
>> +++ b/drivers/isdn/gigaset/ser-gigaset.c
>> @@ -370,19 +370,18 @@ static void gigaset_freecshw(struct cardstate
>> *cs)
>> tasklet_kill(&cs->write_tasklet);
>> if (!cs->hw.ser)
>> return;
>> - dev_set_drvdata(&cs->hw.ser->dev.dev, NULL);
>> platform_device_unregister(&cs->hw.ser->dev);
>> - kfree(cs->hw.ser);
>> - cs->hw.ser = NULL;
>> }
>>
>> static void gigaset_device_release(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> - struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
>> + struct cardstate *cs = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>
>> - /* adapted from platform_device_release() in drivers/base/platform.c */
>> - kfree(dev->platform_data);
>> - kfree(pdev->resource);
>> + if (!cs)
>> + return;
>> + dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
>> + kfree(cs->hw.ser);
>> + cs->hw.ser = NULL;
>> }
>
> This solution assumes that the struct platform_device is moved out of
> the struct ser_cardstate, doesn't it? In other words, this is something
> to do on top of my (draft) patch.
No, that wasn't my intention. I thought of that solution as an
alternative, not an increment to your patch.
> Otherwise we'd still be freeing memory
> managed through reference counting.
Now I#m confused. I thought by following Peter's suggestion to put the
kfree() in the release method we'd avoid just that.
Regards,
Tilman
--
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc
Bonn, Germany
Nous, on a des fleurs et des bougies pour nous protéger.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-11-30 19:10 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> - 2015-11-30 19:40 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-11-30 22:10 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> - 2015-12-01 10:40 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-12-01 11:10 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> - 2015-12-03 00:50 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-12-06 14:40 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> - 2015-12-06 16:40 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-12-06 21:20 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> - 2015-12-07 10:30 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> - 2015-12-07 13:30 +0100
Re: gigaset: freeing an active object Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> - 2015-12-07 19:50 +0100
csiph-web