linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] mm, hmm: Use devm semantics for hmm_devmem

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:18:38 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] mm, hmm: Use devm semantics for
 hmm_devmem_{add, remove}

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 07:22:27PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> devm semantics arrange for resources to be torn down when
> device-driver-probe fails or when device-driver-release completes.
> Similar to devm_memremap_pages() there is no need to support an explicit
> remove operation when the users properly adhere to devm semantics.
> 
> Note that devm_kzalloc() automatically handles allocating node-local
> memory.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

Given that we have no single user of these function I still think we
should just remove them.