[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230123223305.30c586ee@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 22:33:05 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@...adcom.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, jgg@...pe.ca, leon@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
michael.chan@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, selvin.xavier@...adcom.com,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 1/8] bnxt_en: Add auxiliary driver support
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 22:05:28 -0800 Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> @@ -13212,6 +13214,7 @@ static void bnxt_remove_one(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> kfree(bp->rss_indir_tbl);
> bp->rss_indir_tbl = NULL;
> bnxt_free_port_stats(bp);
> + bnxt_aux_priv_free(bp);
> free_netdev(dev);
You're still freeing the memory in which struct device sits regardless
of its reference count.
Greg, is it legal to call:
auxiliary_device_delete(adev); // AKA device_del(&auxdev->dev);
auxiliary_device_uninit(adev); // AKA put_device(&auxdev->dev);
free(adev); // frees struct device
? I tried to explain this three times, maybe there's some wait during
device_del() I'm not seeing which makes this safe :S
Powered by blists - more mailing lists