On 04/24/18 09:19, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Only the overlay notifier callbacks have a chance to potentially get > hold of references to those two resources, but they do not store them. > So it is safe to stop the intentional leaking. > > See also https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/23/1063 and following. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> > --- > > Ideally, we sort out any remaining worries during the 4.17-rc cycle. > > drivers/of/overlay.c | 13 ++----------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/of/overlay.c b/drivers/of/overlay.c > index b35fe88f1851..3553f1f57a62 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/overlay.c > +++ b/drivers/of/overlay.c > @@ -671,17 +671,8 @@ static void free_overlay_changeset(struct > overlay_changeset *ovcs) > of_node_put(ovcs->fragments[i].overlay); > } > kfree(ovcs->fragments); > - > - /* > - * TODO > - * > - * would like to: kfree(ovcs->overlay_tree); > - * but can not since drivers may have pointers into this data > - * > - * would like to: kfree(ovcs->fdt); > - * but can not since drivers may have pointers into this data > - */ > - > + kfree(ovcs->overlay_tree); > + kfree(ovcs->fdt); > kfree(ovcs); > } > >
Nack. It is premature to submit this while the conversation is continuing in the other thread. I'll continue the conversation in the other thread. -Frank
