[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121218164659.a3d3655a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:46:59 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>
Cc: rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH] rtc: recycle id when unloading a rtc driver
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:53:25 -0700
Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org> wrote:
> When calling rtc_device_unregister, we are not freeing the id used by the
> driver.
> So when doing a unload/load cycle for a RTC driver (e.g. rmmod rtc_cmos
> && modprobe rtc_cmos), its id is incremented by one. As a consequence,
> we no longer have neither an rtc0 driver nor a /proc/driver/rtc (as it
> only exists for the first driver).
>
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/class.c | 1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/class.c b/drivers/rtc/class.c
> index dc4c274..37b1d82 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/class.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/class.c
> @@ -238,6 +238,7 @@ void rtc_device_unregister(struct rtc_device *rtc)
> rtc_proc_del_device(rtc);
> device_unregister(&rtc->dev);
> rtc->ops = NULL;
> + ida_simple_remove(&rtc_ida, rtc->id);
> mutex_unlock(&rtc->ops_lock);
> put_device(&rtc->dev);
> }
Now I think about it, this shouldn't have been needed?
That put_device() should call rtc_device_release(), which does the
ida_simple_remove(). Isn't that working?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists