On 05/12/2020 22.19, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 22:04:28 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> On 05/12/2020 21.48, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 20:17:34 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >>>> - unregister_netdev(dev); >>>> - free_netdev(dev); >>>> ucc_geth_memclean(ugeth); >>>> if (of_phy_is_fixed_link(np)) >>>> of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(np); >>>> of_node_put(ugeth->ug_info->tbi_node); >>>> of_node_put(ugeth->ug_info->phy_node); >>>> + unregister_netdev(dev); >>>> + free_netdev(dev); >>> >>> Are you sure you want to move the unregister_netdev() as well as the >>> free? >> >> Hm, dunno, I don't think it's needed per se, but it also shouldn't hurt >> from what I can tell. It seems more natural that they go together, but >> if you prefer a minimal patch that's of course also possible. > > I was concerned about the fact that we free things and release > references while the device may still be up (given that it's > unregister_netdev() that will take it down).
I guess you're right. I'll fix it locally (and pull the patch earlier) and wait a few days with sending an updated version to give Li Yang some time to say if he wants to handle the series or not. Thanks, Rasmus
