[PATCH] clk: fsl-sai: fix memory leak

[PATCH] clk: fsl-sai: fix memory leak

[Michael Walle]

If the device is removed we don't unregister the composite clock. Fix
that.

Fixes: 9cd10205227c ("clk: fsl-sai: new driver")
Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
---
 drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c | 12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
index 0221180a4dd7..1e81c8d8a6fd 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
@@ -68,9 +68,20 @@ static int fsl_sai_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	if (IS_ERR(hw))
 		return PTR_ERR(hw);
 
+	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, hw);
+
 	return devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, of_clk_hw_simple_get, hw);
 }
 
+static int fsl_sai_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	struct clk_hw *hw = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+	clk_hw_unregister_composite(hw);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static const struct of_device_id of_fsl_sai_clk_ids[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "fsl,vf610-sai-clock" },
 	{ }
@@ -79,6 +90,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, of_fsl_sai_clk_ids);
 
 static struct platform_driver fsl_sai_clk_driver = {
 	.probe = fsl_sai_clk_probe,
+	.remove = fsl_sai_clk_remove,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "fsl-sai-clk",
 		.of_match_table = of_fsl_sai_clk_ids,
-- 
2.20.1

Re: [PATCH] clk: fsl-sai: fix memory leak

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Michael Walle (2020-11-01 10:48:18)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
> index 0221180a4dd7..1e81c8d8a6fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
> @@ -68,9 +68,20 @@ static int fsl_sai_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         if (IS_ERR(hw))
>                 return PTR_ERR(hw);
>  
> +       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, hw);
> +
>         return devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, of_clk_hw_simple_get, hw);
>  }
>  
> +static int fsl_sai_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +       struct clk_hw *hw = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +       clk_hw_unregister_composite(hw);

Should we add a devm_clk_hw_register_composite() API and use it here?
That way we don't need a remove function and devm can be used
throughout.

> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static const struct of_device_id of_fsl_sai_clk_ids[] = {
>         { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-sai-clock" },
>         { }

Re: [PATCH] clk: fsl-sai: fix memory leak

[Michael Walle]

Am 2020-11-05 01:29, schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> Quoting Michael Walle (2020-11-01 10:48:18)
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
>> index 0221180a4dd7..1e81c8d8a6fd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-fsl-sai.c
>> @@ -68,9 +68,20 @@ static int fsl_sai_clk_probe(struct platform_device 
>> *pdev)
>>         if (IS_ERR(hw))
>>                 return PTR_ERR(hw);
>> 
>> +       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, hw);
>> +
>>         return devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, of_clk_hw_simple_get, 
>> hw);
>>  }
>> 
>> +static int fsl_sai_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +       struct clk_hw *hw = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +
>> +       clk_hw_unregister_composite(hw);
> 
> Should we add a devm_clk_hw_register_composite() API and use it here?
> That way we don't need a remove function and devm can be used
> throughout.

Can do. But does adding a devm_ function qualify for the -stable branch?
Or should I expect to have exactly this patch as a backport there then?

-michael