From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Anderson Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 08/10] drivers: qcom: rpmh: allow requests to be sent asynchronously Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 13:16:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20180509170159.29682-1-ilina@codeaurora.org> <20180509170159.29682-9-ilina@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180509170159.29682-9-ilina@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lina Iyer Cc: Andy Gross , David Brown , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT" , Rajendra Nayak , Bjorn Andersson , LKML , Stephen Boyd , Evan Green , Matthias Kaehlcke , rplsssn@codeaurora.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Lina Iyer wrote: > /** > @@ -137,6 +140,8 @@ void rpmh_tx_done(const struct tcs_request *msg, int r) > dev_err(rpm_msg->dev, "RPMH TX fail in msg addr=%#x, err=%d\n", > rpm_msg->msg.cmds[0].addr, r); > > + kfree(rpm_msg->free); > + The way the code is written makes it seem like you could free memory _and_ have a completion but you can't. Specifically: * The only plausible thing that "rpm_msg->free" could point to is "rpm_msg". * The complete(compl) would then be accessing freed memory. I believe the kfree() should be at the end of the function. Personally I'd make it more obvious that this is just a boolean value and change to: if (rpm_msg->needs_free) kgree(rpm_msg) ...then the reader of the code doesn't need to go figure out what you're trying to free. -Doug