From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] drm/i915: allow the existing
 error_state to be destroyed
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 14:15:33 -0300
Message-ID: <4FA40EB5.9070503@linux.intel.com>
References: <1335532667-10597-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<1335532667-10597-3-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<20120504115632.GE5443@phenom.ffwll.local>
Reply-To: eugeni.dodonov@intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [143.182.124.37])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5639E968
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri,  4 May 2012 10:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120504115632.GE5443@phenom.ffwll.local>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On 05/04/2012 08:56 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> +static int i915_error_state_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>> +{
>> +	struct seq_file *m = file->private_data;
>> +	struct i915_error_state_file_priv *error_priv = m->private;
>> +
>> +	if (error_priv->error)
>> +		kref_put(&error_priv->error->ref, i915_error_state_free);
>> +	kfree(error_priv);

Maybe a stupid question, but shouldn't we hold the error_lock here as well?

But apart from that:
Reviewed-by: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>