Dave Jiang wrote: > > > On 9/14/23 00:03, Chen Ni wrote: [snip]
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvdimm/of_pmem.c b/drivers/nvdimm/of_pmem.c > > index 1b9f5b8a6167..5765674b36f2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/nvdimm/of_pmem.c > > +++ b/drivers/nvdimm/of_pmem.c > > @@ -30,7 +30,13 @@ static int of_pmem_region_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > if (!priv) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > - priv->bus_desc.provider_name = kstrdup(pdev->name, GFP_KERNEL); > > + priv->bus_desc.provider_name = devm_kstrdup(&pdev->dev, pdev->name, > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!priv->bus_desc.provider_name) { > > + kfree(priv); > > I wonder if priv should be allocated with devm_kzalloc() instead to reduce > the resource management burden. I think it could be but this is the driver and I wonder if leaving the allocation around until the platform device goes away was undesirable for some reason? Ira