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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:34:11 +0100 From: Loys Ollivier <lollivier@...libre.com> To: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@...aro.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>, Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] firmware: qcom: scm: Fix incorrect of_node_put call in scm_init On 07/12/2017 09:42, Jerome Forissier wrote: > > > On 12/06/2017 09:06 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> On 12/06, Loys Ollivier wrote: >>> When using other platform architectures, in the init of the qcom_scm >>> driver, of_node_put is called on /firmware if no qcom dt is found. >>> This results in a kernel error: Bad of_node_put() on /firmware. >>> >>> The call to of_node_put from the qcom_scm init is unnecessary as >>> of_find_matching_node is calling it automatically. >>> >>> Remove this of_node_put(). >>> >>> Fixes: d0f6fa7ba2d6 ("firmware: qcom: scm: Convert SCM to platform driver") >>> Signed-off-by: Loys Ollivier <lollivier@...libre.com> >>> --- >> >> This still looks wrong. Especially if of_find_matching_node() is >> going to look for siblings of the /firmware node for the >> compatible string for scm device. Why do we check at all? Can't >> we just delete this and let of_platform_populate() take care of >> it? BTW, OP-TEE driver seems to have a similar problem. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/29/230 > Well, the patch I sent is a fix for a specific bug I am encountering. I tested the patch and it solves my problem. Stephen, your changes looks good but it's a change in the driver's behavior. Maybe it could be another patch ? It looks like OP-TEE had the same idea. >> >> ---8<---- >> >> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c >> index af4c75217ea6..440d8f796faa 100644 >> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c >> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c >> @@ -626,23 +626,11 @@ static int __init qcom_scm_init(void) >> int ret; >> >> fw_np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "firmware"); >> - >> if (!fw_np) >> - return -ENODEV; >> - >> - np = of_find_matching_node(fw_np, qcom_scm_dt_match); >> - >> - if (!np) { >> - of_node_put(fw_np); >> - return -ENODEV; >> - } >> - >> - of_node_put(np); >> + return 0; >> >> ret = of_platform_populate(fw_np, qcom_scm_dt_match, NULL, NULL); >> - >> of_node_put(fw_np); >> - >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists