Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932307Ab2JSFg3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 01:36:29 -0400 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:5116 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751028Ab2JSFg2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 01:36:28 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,611,1344182400"; d="scan'208";a="6028240" Message-ID: <5080E828.20109@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:42:00 +0800 From: Wen Congyang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100413 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc13 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KOSAKI Motohiro CC: Yasuaki Ishimatsu , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, liuj97@gmail.com, minchan.kim@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]suppress "Device nodeX does not have a release() function" warning References: <507656D1.5020703@jp.fujitsu.com> <50765896.4000300@jp.fujitsu.com> <507E4F0C.9040506@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2012/10/19 13:35:59, Serialize by Router on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2012/10/19 13:36:00, Serialize complete at 2012/10/19 13:36:00 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2723 Lines: 66 At 10/17/2012 04:50 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro Wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Wen Congyang wrote: >> At 10/12/2012 06:33 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro Wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu >>> wrote: >>>> When calling unregister_node(), the function shows following message at >>>> device_release(). >>>> >>>> "Device 'node2' does not have a release() function, it is broken and must >>>> be fixed." >>>> >>>> The reason is node's device struct does not have a release() function. >>>> >>>> So the patch registers node_device_release() to the device's release() >>>> function for suppressing the warning message. Additionally, the patch adds >>>> memset() to initialize a node struct into register_node(). Because the node >>>> struct is part of node_devices[] array and it cannot be freed by >>>> node_device_release(). So if system reuses the node struct, it has a garbage. >>>> >>>> CC: David Rientjes >>>> CC: Jiang Liu >>>> Cc: Minchan Kim >>>> CC: Andrew Morton >>>> CC: KOSAKI Motohiro >>>> Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu >>>> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang >>>> --- >>>> drivers/base/node.c | 11 +++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> Index: linux-3.6/drivers/base/node.c >>>> =================================================================== >>>> --- linux-3.6.orig/drivers/base/node.c 2012-10-11 10:04:02.149758748 +0900 >>>> +++ linux-3.6/drivers/base/node.c 2012-10-11 10:20:34.111806931 +0900 >>>> @@ -252,6 +252,14 @@ static inline void hugetlb_register_node >>>> static inline void hugetlb_unregister_node(struct node *node) {} >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> +static void node_device_release(struct device *dev) >>>> +{ >>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG_SPARSE) && defined(CONFIG_HUGETLBFS) >>>> + struct node *node_dev = to_node(dev); >>>> + >>>> + flush_work(&node_dev->node_work); >>>> +#endif >>>> +} >>> >>> The patch description don't explain why this flush_work() is needed. >> >> If the node is onlined after it is offlined, we will clear the memory, >> so we should flush_work() before node_dev is set to 0. > > So then, it is irrelevant from warning supressness. You should make an > another patch. > OK, I will update it soon. Thanks Wen Congyang -- 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/