From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: power_allocator: do not use devm* interfaces Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 09:50:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20150805165020.GB3603@dtor-ws> References: <20150804163340.GA33245@dtor-ws> <20150805082910.GB2688@e104805> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43]:33138 "EHLO mail-pa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752494AbbHEQuX (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2015 12:50:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150805082910.GB2688@e104805> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Javi Merino Cc: Eduardo Valentin , Zhang Rui , Lukasz Majewski , Peter Feuerer , Sascha Hauer , Punit Agrawal , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 09:29:11AM +0100, Javi Merino wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 05:33:40PM +0100, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > The code in question is called outside of standard driver > > probe()/remove() callbacks and thus will not benefit from use of devm* > > infrastructure. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov > > We added the devm* calls because Eduardo asked for them in the review. > I don't have a strong opinion regarding this, I'll leave the decision > to Eduardo. I tried to look for his reasons, if any, but even in earliest posted versions use devm* for allocating memory I guess this is one of examples of devm* usage in wrong context. Given that you, as you have to, because this is not a device driver, manually freeing that memory with devm_kfree(), the only thing that devm_kzalloc and friends buy you here is extra memory allocations for devres structures and few extra cycles for maintaining them. Thanks. -- Dmitry