linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] power_supply: Adjust devm usage

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, 24 Jul 2015 18:44:41 +0530
From:	Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@...il.com>
To:	Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
Cc:	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Frans Klaver <fransklaver@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] power_supply: Adjust devm usage

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 06:03:38PM +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 05:28:13PM +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
>> >> @@ -267,8 +267,9 @@ static int bq24735_charger_probe() {}
>> >> [...]
>> >
>> > Your patch is missing removal of the
>> > kfree(charger->charger_desc.name) in bq24735_charger_remove().
>>
>> Yes. Because it seems that this kfree is freeing some other data which
>> is not related to devm_kzalloc. I was not sure about removing it.
>> So, I was about to discuss it in a separate thread.s
>
> it's assigned in the probe function:
>
>     name = kasprintf(...);
>     ...
>     supply_desc->name = name;
>     ...
>     power_supply_register(..., supply_desc, ...);
>

Oh. Yes. I missed that.

>> Also, in the remove function we have devm_free_irq. I am unsure it
>> too. Because normally remove functions do not use devm
>> counterparts.
>
> It's required to free the irq before removing the power supply
> device.
>
> If the power supply is registered with devm, that should happen
> automatically, since it is requested before the irq.  Thus the
> remove function can be removed completely at that point :)

This makes sense. Thanks for explanation and review :)
So, can I send all changes along with getting rid of remove
function here in a single patch?

> -- Sebastian



-- 
Vaishali
--
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/