[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130731115527.GR2810@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 07:55:27 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Peter Chen <peter.chen@...escale.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] chipidea: Use devm_request_irq()
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:50:27PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Most things would work just fine - most of the uses of devm_ are just
> resource allocations that can safely be freed in essentially any order.
> It doesn't really matter if you free the driver's private structure
> before you free the clock that's pointing to it or whatever since
> neither has any real connection to the other.
If you have DMA / IRQ / command engine deactivations in devm path
which often is the case with full conversions, freeing any resources
including DMA areas and host private data in the wrong order is a
horrible idea. It's worse as it won't really be noticeable in most
cases.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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