On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:34:09PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, 2015-05-06 at 12:09 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 01:24:12PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Since clk_register_clkdev() is exported for modules the caller should get > > > a > > > pointer to the allocated resources. Otherwise the memory leak is > > > guaranteed on > > > the ->remove() stage. > > > > clk_register_clkdev() is there to assist mass clock registrations, which > > typically happen in platform code. It's there to simplify the "I need > > to register this clock which I'm not going to release again". > > > > I don't see any of these locations trying to unregister their clk from > > clkdev, so I doubt this patch is needed. > > We are doing the driver which will use this (as I mentioned in the cover > letter). > > > > > Where a module wants to remove its clk from clkdev, it should register > > its clk with clkdev_create() and remove it with clkdev_drop(). > > > > You are talking about something in the wild? I can't find > clkdev_create() neither in current clk.git nor in linux-next.git.
It'll be in linux-next RSN. Search lakml for "Fix fallout from per-user struct clk patches" -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
