From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264904AbUGCFMn (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 01:12:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264913AbUGCFMn (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 01:12:43 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:36057 "EHLO ozlabs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264904AbUGCFMm (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jul 2004 01:12:42 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16614.16478.9599.463185@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 15:13:02 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: linas@austin.ibm.com Cc: linuxppc64-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6 PPC64 EEH unbalanced dev_get/put calls In-Reply-To: <20040702134539.W21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> References: <20040702134539.W21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.18 under Emacs 21.3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linas, > This patch fixes some unbalanaced usage of pci_dev_get()/pci_dev_put() calls > in the eeh code. The old code had too many calls to dev_put, which could > cause memory structs to be freed prematurely, possibly leading to bad > bad pointer derefs in certain cases. When I apply this I end up with one pci_dev_get() call in __pci_addr_cache_insert_device and no pci_dev_put() calls. That can't be right, surely? If it is it needs a big fat comment explaining why. > Cross-ref LTC bug 9283 Confused - that's the bug about not using ibm,fw-phb-id. Paul.