Trent Piepho wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>   
>> Does this make it feel better?
>>
>> --- a/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c~a
>> +++ a/drivers/media/video/tuner-core.c
>> @@ -40,11 +40,11 @@
>>  	typeof(&FUNCTION) __a = symbol_request(FUNCTION); \
>>  	if (__a) { \
>>  		__r = (int) __a(ARGS); \
>> +		symbol_put(FUNCTION); \
>>  	} else { \
>>  		printk(KERN_ERR "TUNER: Unable to find " \
>>  				"symbol "#FUNCTION"()\n"); \
>>  	} \
>> -	symbol_put(FUNCTION); \
>>  	__r; \
>>  })
>>     
>
> Should the symbol_put be done at all?  When I wrote the code this is based
> on, it would check if FUNCTION failed or not.  If it failed, the symbol
was
quoted text
> put.  But if it worked, then one was returned a handle into FUNCTION's
> module, and so the symbol was not put.  If it was, the module's refcount
> would be zero but the caller would have a handle into the module.
>
> So if FUNCTION does anything that creates references to the module, and it
> doesn't inc it's own refcount, then the symbol_put shouldn't be done.
>
>   
Trent,

The symbol_put is correct in this case.  This macro above is called 
"tuner_symbol_probe" , used only within tuner-core.c

This macro is used to call the probe function of a tuner sub-module 
(tea5761, tea5767, tda8290).  Regardless of whether the probe succeeds 
or fails, we do the symbol_put.  If the probe succeeds, tuner-core will 
proceed to dvb_attach(that_tuner_attach, params), which does the actual 
module use count increase.

Regards,

Mike
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/