From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lars@metafoo.de>
Received: from smtp-out-231.synserver.de (smtp-out-231.synserver.de
 [212.40.185.231])
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729A41A0C2A
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 18:03:28 +1100 (AEDT)
Message-ID: <54BDFE30.5090303@metafoo.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 08:05:20 +0100
From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: drop ancient protection against sysfs refcounting
 issues
References: <1421693756-12917-1-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de>
 <20150119190142.GA9451@kroah.com>
 <20150119230427.GH26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20150120014159.GA3349@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150120014159.GA3349@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org,
 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
 Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
 Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
 Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On 01/20/2015 02:41 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:04:27PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:01:42AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:55:56PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>>>> index 39d25a8cb1ad..15cc5902cf89 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>>>> @@ -41,7 +41,6 @@
>>>>   #include <linux/of_device.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/of_irq.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/clk/clk-conf.h>
>>>> -#include <linux/completion.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/hardirq.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/irqflags.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/rwsem.h>
>>>> @@ -1184,8 +1183,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(i2c_new_dummy);
>>>>
>>>>   static void i2c_adapter_dev_release(struct device *dev)
>>>>   {
>>>> -	struct i2c_adapter *adap = to_i2c_adapter(dev);
>>>> -	complete(&adap->dev_released);
>>>> +	/* empty, but the driver core insists we need a release function */
>>>
>>> Yeah, it does, but I hate to see this in "real" code as something is
>>> probably wrong with it if it happens.
>>>
>>> Please move the rest of 'i2c_del_adapter' into the release function
>>> (what was after the wait_for_completion() call), and then all should be
>>> fine.
>>
>> Are you sure about that?  Some drivers do this, eg,
>>
>>          i2c_del_adapter(&drv_data->adapter);
>>          free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data);
>>
>> where drv_data was allocated using devm_kzalloc(), and so will be
>> released when the ->remove callback (which calls the above
>> i2c_del_adapter()) returns... freeing the embedded device struct.
>
> But that will fail today if the memory is freed in i2c_del_adapter(), so
> there shouldn't be any change in logic here.
>
> Or am I missing something obvious?

The memory is not freed in i2c_del_adapter().