[06/10,V2] spi: Add SPI driver for mx233/mx28

[Guenter Roeck]

Hi Marek,

On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:31:04AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Guenter Roeck,
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > +static int __devexit mxs_spi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct spi_master *host;
> > > +	struct mxs_spi *spi;
> > > +	struct mxs_ssp *ssp;
> > > +
> > > +	host = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > +	spi = spi_master_get_devdata(host);
> > > +	ssp = &spi->ssp;
> > > +
> > > +	spi_unregister_master(host);
> > > +
> > > +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
> > > +
> > > +	clk_disable_unprepare(ssp->clk);
> > > +
> > > +	spi_master_put(host);
> > > +	kfree(host);
> > > +
> > 
> > Is the kfree() here and in the probe function really necessary ?
> 
> It certainly would seem that way.
> 
> > Couple of reasons for asking: No other SPI master driver calls it in the
> > remove function (unless I missed it), most drivers don't call it in the
> > probe function error path, and if I call it in the remove function in a
> > SPI master driver I am working on, and load/unload the module several
> > times in a row, I get a nasty kernel crash.
> 
> It seems the spi_master class takes care of that kfree() in 
> spi.c:spi_master_release() . Good catch, thanks!
> 
Given that, and assuming that spi_master_put() results in the call to
spi_master_release() for both the error case in the probe function and for
the release function, I take it that the kfree() is not needed at all,
and that the documentation for spi_alloc_master() is wrong. Does that sound
reasonable ?

Thanks,
Guenter