[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6ea00d70.3f76.1753a4bb59b.Coremail.dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 14:00:41 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
From: dinghao.liu@....edu.cn
To: "Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc: "Chen-Yu Tsai" <wens@...e.org>, "Kangjie Lu" <kjlu@....edu>,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
"Alessandro Zummo" <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] rtc: sun6i: Fix memleak in sun6i_rtc_clk_init
> On 26/08/2020 16:55:14+0800, dinghao.liu@....edu.cn wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 3:59 PM Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > When clk_hw_register_fixed_rate_with_accuracy() fails,
> > > > clk_data should be freed. It's the same for the subsequent
> > > > error paths.
> > >
> > > I suppose you should also unregister the already registered clocks
> > > in the latter two error paths?
> > >
> >
> > Sounds reasonable. But I find that the existing kernel code takes different
> > strategies for this case. of_sama5d4_sckc_setup() uses clk_hw_unregister()
> > after clk_hw_register_fixed_rate_with_accuracy(), while _of_fixed_clk_setup()
> > uses clk_hw_unregister_fixed_rate(). But at91sam926x_pmc_setup() just does
> > nothing in this case.
>
> I guess you should use clk_hw_unregister_fixed_rate after
> clk_hw_register_fixed_rate_with_accuracy. clk_hw_unregister will leak
> the struct clk_fixed_rate. It doesn't matter too much for
> of_sama5d4_sckc_setup and at91sam926x_pmc_setup because if th clock
> can't be registered, the platform will not boot.
Thank you for your advice! I will submit a new patch soon.
Regards,
Dinghao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists