Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:45:47 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To:     Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@huawei.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
        bhelgaas@google.com, gcherian@marvell.com, guohanjun@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: PCI: fix memleak when calling pci_iomap/unmap()
Message-ID: <20200907104546.GC26513@gaia>
References: <20200905024811.74701-1-yangyingliang@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200905024811.74701-1-yangyingliang@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Sep 05, 2020 at 10:48:11AM +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index 1006ed2d7c604..ddfa1c53def48 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -217,4 +217,9 @@ void pcibios_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
>  	acpi_pci_remove_bus(bus);
>  }
>  
> +void pci_iounmap(struct pci_dev *dev, void __iomem *addr)
> +{
> +	iounmap(addr);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_iounmap);

So, what's wrong with the generic pci_iounmap() implementation?
Shouldn't it call iounmap() already?

-- 
Catalin