From: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@insightbb.com>
To: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: get_device in device_create_file
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 21:13:05 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3
Cc: greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20060801132509.27269013.zaitcev@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060801132509.27269013.zaitcev@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200608012113.06191.dtor@insightbb.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1088
Lines: 37

On Tuesday 01 August 2006 16:25, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> Hi, Greg:
> 
> This code makes no sense to me:
> 
> > int device_create_file(struct device * dev, struct device_attribute * attr)
> > {
> > 	int error = 0;
> > 	if (get_device(dev)) {
> > 		error = sysfs_create_file(&dev->kobj, &attr->attr);
> > 		put_device(dev);
> > 	}
> > 	return error;
> > }
> 
> If the struct device *dev, and its presumably enclosing structure,
> can be freed by a different CPU (or pre-empt), then get_device
> does not protect it. It can be freed before get_device is reached.

*nod*

> Buf it not, and the caller has a reference, then the call to
> get_device is redundant.
>

Yes it is. There are few of redundant gets and puts sprinkled around
in the driver core, but the last time I mentioned that Greg was not
quite ready to get rid of them ;)
 

-- 
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/