Re: [PATCH 1/6] cxl/mem: Fix devm_cxl_memdev_edac_release() confusion

[<dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Dave Jiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/3/25 7:21 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > A device release method is only for undoing allocations on the path to
> > preparing the device for device_add(). In contrast, devm allocations are
> > post device_add(), are acquired during / after ->probe() and are released
> > synchronous with ->remove().
> > 
> > So, a "devm" helper in a "release" method is a clear anti-pattern.
> > 
> > Move this devm release action where it belongs, an action created at edac
> > object creation time. Otherwise, this leaks resources until
> > cxl_memdev_release() time which may be long after these xarray and error
> > record caches have gone idle.
> > 
> > Note, this also fixes up the type of @cxlmd->err_rec_array which needlessly
> > dropped type-safety.
> > 
> > Fixes: 0b5ccb0de1e2 ("cxl/edac: Support for finding memory operation attributes from the current boot")
> > Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> > Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > Cc: Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@huawei.com>
> > Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> 
> This can go into fixes right? Does not look like a dependency for the rest of the series.

It could go into fixes, but until someone reports a practical problem
the urgency is low. The impacts of the leak are minor especially on
typical builds where CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE is disabled. The main
motivation to push it along is to interdict any further attempts to make
the "release" vs "devm" mistake.