From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zajec5@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?=) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:25:39 +0200 Subject: [RFC][PATCH V3] axi: add AXI bus driver In-Reply-To: <20110412151453.GA20978@kroah.com> References: <20110411210631.GA28559@kroah.com> <20110411212513.GA17809@kroah.com> <20110411215619.GA27943@kroah.com> <20110411223632.GB31833@kroah.com> <20110411233506.GA13240@kroah.com> <20110412151453.GA20978@kroah.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 2011/4/12 Greg KH : > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 07:41:18AM +0200, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: >> > You can't do that, no static struct devices please. ?Make these dynamic >> > and everything will be fine. ?The -mm tree used to have a huge warning >> > if you ever tried to register a statically allocated struct, but that >> > didn't really work out, but would have saved you a lot of time here, >> > sorry. >> > >> > So dynamically allocate the structures and you will be fine. >> >> Well, I saw that along kernel, I had no idea there is anything wrong >> about this. It seems more ppl do not know about this: >> struct radeon_ib ? ? ?ibs[RADEON_IB_POOL_SIZE]; >> struct radeon_pm_clock_info clock_info[8]; >> struct radeon_pm_profile profiles[PM_PROFILE_MAX]; >> struct radeon_surface_reg surface_regs[RADEON_GEM_MAX_SURFACES]; > > Are you sure these are all containing a 'struct device'? I didn't catch from you mail that you mean "struct device" only. I though it apply to all structs. >> checkpatch does no catch this, so maybe just some manual? Could you >> point me to it? > > It's a structure that has dynamic lifetime rules, you can't statically > allocate it safely. ?It's that simple. Ah, and this is a great explanation, for all the time I tough the problem is memory issue. Now it makes sense, thanks. -- Rafa?