On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:20:25 +0300
Artem Bityutskiy <dedeki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 09:50 +0800, b35...@freescale.com wrote:
> > From: Liu Shuo <b35...@freescale.com>
> >
> > The global data fsl_lbc_ctrl_dev->nand don't have to be freed in
> > fsl_elbc_chip_remove(). The right place to do that is in
> > fsl_elbc_nand_remove()
> > if elbc_fcm_ctrl->counter is zero.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Shuo <b35...@freescale.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c | 1 -
> > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c
> > b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c
> > index 0bb254c..a212116 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c
> > @@ -829,7 +829,6 @@ static int fsl_elbc_chip_remove(struct fsl_elbc_mtd
> > *priv)
> >
> > elbc_fcm_ctrl->chips[priv->bank] = NULL;
> > kfree(priv);
> > - kfree(elbc_fcm_ctrl);
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> Do we have to assign fsl_lbc_ctrl_dev->nand to NULL in
> fsl_elbc_nand_remove() then? I think that assignment can be killed then.
>
> if (!elbc_fcm_ctrl->counter) {
> fsl_lbc_ctrl_dev->nand = NULL;
> kfree(elbc_fcm_ctrl);
> }
>
If we're freeing fsl_lbc_ctrl, we'd better get rid of references to it...
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
