linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: Do not drop unheld reference on device node

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:57:39 +0100
From:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
CC:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: Do not drop unheld reference on device node

On 11/25/2013 08:29 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:28:15PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 11/22/2013 08:22 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 05:31:46PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>> On 11/22/2013 05:16 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 12:49:48AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>> Yes. Sounds like I missed it.
>>>>
>>>> This regression has been introduced by:
>>>>
>>>> commit 326e31eebe61dc838e031ea16968b2cfb43443e3
>>>> Author: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
>>>> Date:   Tue Oct 1 11:00:53 2013 +0200
>>>>
>>>>      clocksource: Put nodes passed to CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE
>>>> callbacks centrally
>>>>
>>>>      Instead of letting each driver call of_node_put do it centrally in the
>>>>      loop that also calls the CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE callbacks. This is less
>>>>      prone to error and also moves getting and putting the references
>>>> into the
>>>>      same function.
>>>>
>>>>      Consequently all respective of_node_put calls in drivers are removed.
>>>>
>>>>      Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
>>>>      Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
>>>>      Acked-by: David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>
>>> Still all but the hook in clocksource_of_init of this commit was
>>> correct, right? (Well, but this buggy hunk makes the commit log wrong.)
>>
>> I don't understand your comment, can you elaborate ?
> My patch added an of_node_put in clocksource_of_init and dropped several
> of_node_puts in drivers. This thread is about the first being wrong. My
> question was if dropping the others was correct.

Yes, Thierry's patch removes the of_node_puts but I am also wondering if 
we shouldn't just revert the patch 326e31eebe61dc838e instead.


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

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