On Thu 30 Nov 08:46 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote:
> +static int rproc_release_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> +
> + /* clean up carveout allocations */
> + dma_free_coherent(dev->parent, mem->len, mem->va, mem->dma);
> + list_del(&mem->node);
The core is responsible for putting the node on a list, so let the
cleanup take if off the list.
> + kfree(mem);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
[..]
> @@ -319,12 +322,11 @@ struct rproc_mem_entry {
> dma_addr_t dma;
> int len;
> u32 da;
> + int (*release)(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_mem_entry *mem);
The placement here seems random, please move it last in the struct.
> void *priv;
> struct list_head node;
> };
>
Regards,
Bjorn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bjorn Andersson [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 1:34 AM
> To: Loic PALLARDY <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-
> [email protected]; Arnaud POULIQUEN <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/16] remoteproc: add release ops in
> rproc_mem_entry struct
>
> On Thu 30 Nov 08:46 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote:
>
> > +static int rproc_release_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, struct
> rproc_mem_entry *mem)
> > +{
> > + struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> > +
> > + /* clean up carveout allocations */
> > + dma_free_coherent(dev->parent, mem->len, mem->va, mem-
> >dma);
> > + list_del(&mem->node);
>
> The core is responsible for putting the node on a list, so let the
> cleanup take if off the list.
ok
>
> > + kfree(mem);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> [..]
> > @@ -319,12 +322,11 @@ struct rproc_mem_entry {
> > dma_addr_t dma;
> > int len;
> > u32 da;
> > + int (*release)(struct rproc *rproc, struct rproc_mem_entry *mem);
>
> The placement here seems random, please move it last in the struct.
ok
>
> > void *priv;
> > struct list_head node;
> > };
> >
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn