linux-kernel - Re: question about drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c

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]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdb-yzpg2SJ--ksjM8TDu1cuCxMCn1cHj9OPQQt7DsjHeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:08:57 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:	plagnioj@...osoft.com, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
	rob.herring@...xeda.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: question about drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2012, Linus Walleij wrote:

>> I was under the impression that if you exit the probe function
>> with a negative value anything allocated with devm_* was freed
>> immediately, that is atleast how it's described in
>> Documentation/driver-model/devres.txt
>> atleast that seems to be the intetion with the whole thing.
>
> That is true, but I wasn't sure taht this function was part of the probe
> function.  Its only reference is in:
>
> static struct pinctrl_ops at91_pctrl_ops = {
>         .get_groups_count       = at91_get_groups_count,
>         .get_group_name         = at91_get_group_name,
>         .get_group_pins         = at91_get_group_pins,
>         .pin_dbg_show           = at91_pin_dbg_show,
>         .dt_node_to_map         = at91_dt_node_to_map,
>         .dt_free_map            = at91_dt_free_map,
> };
>
> Working backwards, one possible call site is pinctrl_get, which is an
> exported function.  Is it safe to assume that it will always be called
> from within a probe function?

Aha sorry I got it all backwards :-(

Well, yes in that case it's devm_kfree() for sure.

Thanks!

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/