From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt/sparc: Introduce the use of the managed version of kzalloc Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 08:07:38 +0800 (SGT) Message-ID: References: <20140522193430.GA16315@himangi-Dell> <20140522194539.GA7708@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20140522231434.GA9546@core.coreip.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140522231434.GA9546@core.coreip.homeip.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Himangi Saraogi , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 22 May 2014, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Julia, > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 07:03:37AM +0800, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 22 May 2014, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > Hi Himangi, > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 01:04:30AM +0530, Himangi Saraogi wrote: > > > > This patch moves data allocated using kzalloc to managed data allocated > > > > using devm_kzalloc and cleans now unnecessary kfrees in probe and remove > > > > functions. Also the unnecessary labels are done away with. > > > > > > Please no more partial devm conversions. I am not interested in patches > > > that change only 1 resource to be managed and leaving the rest as is. > > > > > > If you want to do devm conversion please do it if you convert all (or at > > > least majority) of resource handling to managed resources. > > > > Sorry, I don't think we are clear on what is wanted. Himangi's patches > > convert everything where a devm function is already available (to our > > knowledge). Do you prefer that new devm functions be introduced? On the > > one hand, that is perhaps useful from a safety point of view. On the > > other hand, it could lead to a huge number of rarely used devm functions > > that no one knows about and to a lot of code diversity. So I don't know > > what is the good solution. > > I strongly dislike changes that mix managed and non-managed resources in > the same driver as it only leads to confusion: should this resource be > freed or will it be freed automatically. > > I am applying patches that convert all (or almost all) resources in a > driver into managed ones, but if that is not [currently] possible then > those drivers are probably better left alone (maybe after additional > audit). OK, we will try to take that into account. Are the new managed functoins added to the devres docuentation? thanks, julia