On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 20:58 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Michael Ellerman writes: > > > When I changed irq_alloc_host() to take an of_node > > (52964f87c64e6c6ea671b5bf3030fb1494090a48: "Add an > > optional device_node pointer to the irq_host"), > > I botched the reference counting semantics. > > > > Stephen pointed out that it's irq_alloc_host()'s > > business if it needs to take an additional reference > > to the device_node, the caller shouldn't need to care. > > To make that clean we also need a free routine, so > > the caller doesn't have to deal with dropping the > > reference. > > > > Luckily we now have an irq_free_host() where we can > > drop the reference - so we can make the reference > > counting internal to irq_alloc_host()/irq_free_host(). > > Is this needed for 2.6.26?
No. > What's the worst possible effect of this bug? Only nodes having an incorrect reference count - in either direction. But pseries is fine, so there should be no real bug. cheers -- Michael Ellerman OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183) We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
