From: Nicolas Palix Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:09:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] powerpc/powermac: Add missing of_node_put Message-Id: <200812071509.09091.npalix@diku.dk> List-Id: References: <200812021445.18670.npalix@diku.dk> <18747.13668.304923.709761@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20081207164333.78b69d16.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20081207164333.78b69d16.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Julia Lawall , Paul Mackerras , Andrew Morton On Sunday 07 December 2008 06:43:33 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 13:31:00 +1100 Paul Mackerras wrote: > > > > I'm really in two minds about applying any of the of_node_put patches > > that only affect powermacs. The reference counts only matter on > > platforms where we update the OF device tree at runtime, which is > > currently only IBM pSeries machines. Since we don't have any hotplug > > on powermacs, and never will have, the OF device tree is completely > > static and we don't actually need refcounts on the nodes at all, so > > who cares if they're a bit higher than they might be? > > > > In particular, the VIA whose node we're looking for here is built-in > > on the motherboard, and there can never be more than one, and it can > > never be removed. > > I my mind it is about consistent use of the API and good examples for > people to copy. Also, in about a year you will be presented with the > same set of patches when a new pair of eyes looks at the same code and > notices the discrepancy ... > Hi Andrew, Indeed, there is an updated version of this patch in my second mail which fixes this issue. http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/3/88 Moreover, there is still a reference count unbalanced with your patch in the case where the function returns 1. Regards, -- Nicolas Palix