[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2025063022-riverbed-country-5c2b@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 13:18:14 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Usyskin, Alexander" <alexander.usyskin@...el.com>
Cc: "Abliyev, Reuven" <reuven.abliyev@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [char-misc-next v2] mei: bus: fix device leak
On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 10:52:08AM +0000, Usyskin, Alexander wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [char-misc-next v2] mei: bus: fix device leak
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 02:05:20PM +0300, Alexander Usyskin wrote:
> > > The bus rescan function creates bus devices for all clients.
> > > The fixup routine is executed on all devices, unneeded
> > > devices are removed and fully initialized once set
> > > is_added flag to 1.
> >
> > I don't understand why the mei bus is so special that it has to have
> > this type of flag, when no other bus has that for its devices. The bus
> > code should know if the device has been properly added or not, if not,
> > then no release function can be called and the structure isn't even
> > viable to be used or touched at all.
> >
> > So why is this needed?
>
> It seems that is_added can be replaced by device_is_registered().
Again, why do you need to track that?
But yes, that should work, although using it is usually a sign that
something is a bit broken in the design.
thanks
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists