RE: [PATCH] devres: Freeing the drs after all release() are called

From: Liu, Chuansheng
Date: Wed Nov 06 2013 - 20:19:09 EST


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tejun Heo [mailto:htejun@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of tj@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:52 AM
> To: Liu, Chuansheng
> Cc: Greg KH; dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] devres: Freeing the drs after all release() are called
> Hello,
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 12:36:56AM +0000, Liu, Chuansheng wrote:
> > Yes, I knew I can put the code always like below:
> > A = devm_kzalloc();
> > C = devm_kzalloc();
> > ...
> > B= devm_request_threaded_irq(isr_handler);
> >
> > But, the above is just one simple coding prototype, if there are many calling:
> > E -- > F -- > D -- >... then to devm_kzalloc().
> >
> > To be honest, it will make code too hard to always adapt the rule?
> > And I trying to find out every potential devm_kzalloc() before irq requesting.
> It isn't a good idea to paper over existing bugs from upper layer.
> You realize that the above code sequence is already buggy during init
> unless there's something explicitly blocking generation of irqs until
> init is complete, right? The right thing to do would be either
> reordering the operations or wrapping the operation which unblocks irq
> at the end of init with devres so that irq gets blocked before the
> rest of release proceeds.
> What we must *NOT* do is working around existing bugs in a half-assed
> way from midlayer.

Yes, doing the right order initialization is always right thing.
But normally when we hit the panic during shutdown/reboot like below:
PAGE FAULT XXX 0x12345678

It is really difficult to debug.
So at least, could we have method to expose these hidden issues?


I am reviewing other codes' usage of devm_request_threaded_irq() also.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at