* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 6:22 [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions Vaishali Thakkar
@ 2015-08-19 8:24 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-08-19 11:38 ` Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-19 11:57 ` Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-27 1:57 ` Viresh Kumar
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2015-08-19 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vaishali Thakkar
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Vaishali Thakkar
<vthakkar1994@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
> ---
> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
> things, I am fine with it too.
I will rather ask you to do this:
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
index 620dcd405ff6..a04055ea5d94 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
@@ -584,8 +584,8 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
- load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
- GFP_KERNEL);
+ load_cpu = kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
}
for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
@@ -607,22 +607,20 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
dynamic_power = get_dynamic_power(cpufreq_device, freq);
ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
- if (ret) {
- if (load_cpu)
- devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
- return ret;
- }
+ if (ret)
+ goto free;
- if (load_cpu) {
+ if (load_cpu)
trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power(
&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
- devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
- }
-
*power = static_power + dynamic_power;
- return 0;
+
+free:
+ kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
+
+ return ret;
}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 8:24 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2015-08-19 11:38 ` Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-19 11:57 ` Vaishali Thakkar
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Vaishali Thakkar @ 2015-08-19 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Vaishali Thakkar
> <vthakkar1994@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
>> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
>> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
>> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
>> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
>> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
>> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
>> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
>> things, I am fine with it too.
>
> I will rather ask you to do this:
Ok. I was not sure about introducing new label. Thanks.
I will send v2 with the changes you pointed.
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 620dcd405ff6..a04055ea5d94 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -584,8 +584,8 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
> thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
>
> - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + load_cpu = kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> }
>
> for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> @@ -607,22 +607,20 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
> thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
>
> dynamic_power = get_dynamic_power(cpufreq_device, freq);
> ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> - if (ret) {
> - if (load_cpu)
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (ret)
> + goto free;
>
> - if (load_cpu) {
> + if (load_cpu)
> trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power(
> &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
>
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> - }
> -
> *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
> - return 0;
> +
> +free:
> + kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> +
> + return ret;
> }
--
Vaishali
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 8:24 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-08-19 11:38 ` Vaishali Thakkar
@ 2015-08-19 11:57 ` Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-19 12:02 ` Viresh Kumar
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Vaishali Thakkar @ 2015-08-19 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Vaishali Thakkar
> <vthakkar1994@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
>> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
>> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
>> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
>> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
>> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
>> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
>> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
>> things, I am fine with it too.
>
> I will rather ask you to do this:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 620dcd405ff6..a04055ea5d94 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -584,8 +584,8 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
> thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
>
> - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + load_cpu = kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> }
Sorry. I forgot to ask you one more thing. devm_kcalloc takes one more
argument then
kcalloc. So, the change I did is correct I guess. And I'm not sure why
you suggested this
change? I assume you just want me to correct in my patch for last
argument. But that line
also comes under 80 characters.
> for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> @@ -607,22 +607,20 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
> thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
>
> dynamic_power = get_dynamic_power(cpufreq_device, freq);
> ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> - if (ret) {
> - if (load_cpu)
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (ret)
> + goto free;
>
> - if (load_cpu) {
> + if (load_cpu)
> trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power(
> &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
>
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> - }
> -
> *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
> - return 0;
> +
> +free:
> + kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> +
> + return ret;
> }
--
Vaishali
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 11:57 ` Vaishali Thakkar
@ 2015-08-19 12:02 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2015-08-19 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vaishali Thakkar
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On 19-08-15, 17:27, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> > I will rather ask you to do this:
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > index 620dcd405ff6..a04055ea5d94 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > @@ -584,8 +584,8 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct
> > thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> > u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
> >
> > - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> > - GFP_KERNEL);
> > + load_cpu = kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > }
>
> Sorry. I forgot to ask you one more thing. devm_kcalloc takes one more
> argument then
> kcalloc. So, the change I did is correct I guess.
Right, there is an extra argument in my code.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 6:22 [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-19 8:24 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2015-08-27 1:57 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-09-29 16:39 ` Javi Merino
2015-08-27 8:59 ` Javi Merino
2015-10-10 8:49 ` Zhang Rui
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2015-08-27 1:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vaishali Thakkar, Javi Merino
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Vaishali Thakkar
<vthakkar1994@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
> ---
> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
> things, I am fine with it too.
> ---
> drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 620dcd4..babf8b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -584,8 +584,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
>
> - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + load_cpu = kcalloc(ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu), GFP_KERNEL);
> }
>
> for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> @@ -609,7 +608,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> if (ret) {
> if (load_cpu)
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -618,7 +617,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
>
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> }
>
> *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
@Eduardo: Ignore V2 and apply this one :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-27 1:57 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2015-09-29 16:39 ` Javi Merino
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Javi Merino @ 2015-09-29 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eduardo Valentin, Zhang Rui
Cc: Vaishali Thakkar, Viresh Kumar, Linux PM list,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Hi Eduardo, Rui,
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 02:57:08AM +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Vaishali Thakkar
> <vthakkar1994@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
> > for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
> > allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
> > need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
> > devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
> > kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
> > because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
> > have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
> > things, I am fine with it too.
> > ---
> > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > index 620dcd4..babf8b3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > @@ -584,8 +584,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> > u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
> >
> > - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> > - GFP_KERNEL);
> > + load_cpu = kcalloc(ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu), GFP_KERNEL);
> > }
> >
> > for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> > @@ -609,7 +608,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> > if (ret) {
> > if (load_cpu)
> > - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> > + kfree(load_cpu);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -618,7 +617,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> > freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
> >
> > - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> > + kfree(load_cpu);
> > }
> >
> > *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
>
> Acked-by: Javi Merino <javi.merino@arm.com>
>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
>
> @Eduardo: Ignore V2 and apply this one :)
Looks like this fell through the cracks. Can you pick it up?
Cheers,
Javi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 6:22 [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions Vaishali Thakkar
2015-08-19 8:24 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-08-27 1:57 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2015-08-27 8:59 ` Javi Merino
2015-10-10 8:49 ` Zhang Rui
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Javi Merino @ 2015-08-27 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vaishali Thakkar
Cc: Zhang Rui, Eduardo Valentin, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 07:22:19AM +0100, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Javi Merino <javi.merino@arm.com>
> ---
> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
> things, I am fine with it too.
I wouldn't have minded changing the
if (load_cpu)
kfree(load_cpu)
to just "kfree(load_cpu)" but I don't have a strong preference. I'm
also happy with the patch as it is.
Cheers,
Javi
> ---
> drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 620dcd4..babf8b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -584,8 +584,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
>
> - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + load_cpu = kcalloc(ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu), GFP_KERNEL);
> }
>
> for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> @@ -609,7 +608,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> if (ret) {
> if (load_cpu)
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -618,7 +617,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
>
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> }
>
> *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions
2015-08-19 6:22 [PATCH] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions Vaishali Thakkar
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-27 8:59 ` Javi Merino
@ 2015-10-10 8:49 ` Zhang Rui
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2015-10-10 8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vaishali Thakkar; +Cc: Eduardo Valentin, linux-pm, linux-kernel
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 11:52 +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> In the function cpufreq_get_requested_power, the memory allocated
> for load_cpu is live within the function only. And after the
> allocation it is immediately freed with devm_kfree. There is no
> need to allocate memory for load_cpu with devm function so replace
> devm_kcalloc with kcalloc and devm_kfree with kfree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>
> ---
> This patch is having one checkpatch.pl warning which suggests that
> kfree(NULL) is safe. But I think leaving code with if is nice
> because it reflects the fact that kcalloc was under an if. So, I
> have ignored checkpatch. If maintainer wants me to go for changing
> things, I am fine with it too.
Applied. And I've removed the "if (load_cpu)" for kfree() to avoid
warning reports.
thanks,
rui
> ---
> drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 620dcd4..babf8b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -584,8 +584,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> if (trace_thermal_power_cpu_get_power_enabled()) {
> u32 ncpus = cpumask_weight(&cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus);
>
> - load_cpu = devm_kcalloc(&cdev->device, ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + load_cpu = kcalloc(ncpus, sizeof(*load_cpu), GFP_KERNEL);
> }
>
> for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus) {
> @@ -609,7 +608,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> ret = get_static_power(cpufreq_device, tz, freq, &static_power);
> if (ret) {
> if (load_cpu)
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -618,7 +617,7 @@ static int cpufreq_get_requested_power(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> &cpufreq_device->allowed_cpus,
> freq, load_cpu, i, dynamic_power, static_power);
>
> - devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
> + kfree(load_cpu);
> }
>
> *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread