From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CBA429ACF6; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 08:36:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777019808; cv=none; b=lJX3E3vougbV8md4KnPwnOnSdEW3cFgCxiZD69q/vSMNqc+ToRCmE+zVefIv3mAJTr5/h3K9NdnNLWbpbQq/KT6b7cnKmznW2Wb2S1dokNt2GZsPVJR7fg9GUdvVg+cLF1JW7+jGYzIYmUYlT2TkuQ8IlukY2nPIH4jdT+QdJUo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777019808; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0ceewUDuJsreRKk1zTgCLogEwTdwY05YA5D3X0W5jSU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mhkFCcKRQNx6IAl/ASPTZp77az67sjcU6oxs4eaDbp0G9/mlEOtM7fP/cSiwcTYWWETD3hwQobXmZranluqnVjKOQ9Ccn9myQETpAYU6UNwQ0OAifdmJsWoQuQl+DPrH4lz4zKXH6IKE7z0hd+2iSVedjGCFQTxR2vGlzMcieY4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=U/QpYicz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="U/QpYicz" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1777019807; x=1808555807; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=0ceewUDuJsreRKk1zTgCLogEwTdwY05YA5D3X0W5jSU=; b=U/QpYicz+UCmRfVBybPSHMcpk7QvfmujcIE/jGC3dmozJKWEsYXlE316 La9npd6N0AO8eIa0w9dwST5ZSNs83wjtg6f/t0fk0rDWQwRK2eEElH7fS bzeq1t6+A72Q6A98/yX0hWlCrywFSGzeb0xBW2Dhlz4ZIfik75Y3IQLi4 qDj+O5LCjLwbgYR5n5fDhJLRDHheg/Aw2z06hPZDoGPF0Lm+V994px4dR R86BqqZ/IypbOPImVztMtW65o+5p1jawa2JpOn/9sjVzo8hLspy/+cQwd PgYkOvL0Boyg3MtiyO7IjEG+KxarPqpBaa170ooYaO8HQmvQK9WBPxkXx Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ZDzFUIGNS3KVsdFs2ilgww== X-CSE-MsgGUID: VELhW0dpTxysZogSQcOU8g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11765"; a="77701319" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,196,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="77701319" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by orvoesa112.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Apr 2026 01:36:47 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: +Zh59KVHS0yvAVPrKvsA0g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CxKDFqbLSsWxPy5ctutkhQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,196,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="233201129" Received: from pgcooper-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.71]) by orviesa007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Apr 2026 01:36:45 -0700 Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 11:36:42 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Guangshuo Li Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linus Walleij , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] eeprom: digsy_mtc: fix reference leak on failed device registration Message-ID: References: <20260415165203.3584869-1-lgs201920130244@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 04:21:05PM +0800, Guangshuo Li wrote: > On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 at 15:52, Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 12:52:02AM +0800, Guangshuo Li wrote: ... > After re-checking it, digsy_mtc_eeprom is a static platform_device and it > does not provide a dev.release callback. Therefore calling > platform_device_put() on the platform_device_register() failure path is > not appropriate here and can trigger the missing release callback warning. > > This falls into the same static platform_device pattern pointed out in > the other reviews, so I will drop this patch. Ah, good point! Indeed, this device is either present for the entire system run-time or not at all. Even if it's erroneously attempted to be instantiated it's still not a big deal. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko