From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: SM501 core driver Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:29:47 +0000 Message-ID: <20070207152947.GB21120@fluff.org.uk> References: <20070206192628.GA13644@fluff.org.uk> <20070206210930.fc814bf6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070207114825.GA21120@fluff.org.uk> <20070207142415.GE1712@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070207142415.GE1712@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Cc: Ben Dooks , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 06:24:15AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 11:48:25AM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 09:09:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 19:26:28 +0000 Ben Dooks wrote: > > > > +/* sm501_null_release > > > > + * > > > > + * A release function for the platform devices we create to keep the > > > > + * driver core happy, and stop any crashed when the devices are removed > > > > +*/ > > > > + > > > > +static void sm501_null_release(struct device *dev) > > > > +{ > > > > +} > > > > > > Greg might have an opinion on that ;) > > > > Without this the system OOPses when the driver is removed. > > Are you sure about that? And it's not just an error message being > printed out telling you that you must provide a release function? > > And BIG hint, providing an empty release function just to shut up the > kernel is NOT a fix. You really need to free your memory here, not just > ignore it. Sorry, you where right, confused OOPS and backtrace from call to BUG(). I also realise that having earlier changed from carrying the devices pre-allocated in the per-device data, to kmalloc pool that we do need to free the device data on release. I will fix for the next release. -- Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/) 'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'