On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 22:04:28 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 05/12/2020 21.48, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 20:17:34 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> - unregister_netdev(dev); > >> - free_netdev(dev); > >> ucc_geth_memclean(ugeth); > >> if (of_phy_is_fixed_link(np)) > >> of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(np); > >> of_node_put(ugeth->ug_info->tbi_node); > >> of_node_put(ugeth->ug_info->phy_node); > >> + unregister_netdev(dev); > >> + free_netdev(dev); > > > > Are you sure you want to move the unregister_netdev() as well as the > > free? > > Hm, dunno, I don't think it's needed per se, but it also shouldn't hurt > from what I can tell. It seems more natural that they go together, but > if you prefer a minimal patch that's of course also possible.
I was concerned about the fact that we free things and release references while the device may still be up (given that it's unregister_netdev() that will take it down). > I only noticed because I needed to add a free of the ug_info in a later > patch.
