linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 04/18] powerpc/pseries: add of_node_put() in dlpar_detach

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Fri, 19 Oct 2018 11:10:19 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/18] powerpc/pseries: add of_node_put() in dlpar_detach_node()

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:09 PM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/18/18 10:09, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 07:37:24PM -0700, frowand.list@...il.com wrote:
> >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>
> >>
> >> "of: overlay: add missing of_node_get() in __of_attach_node_sysfs"
> >> added a missing of_node_get() to __of_attach_node_sysfs().  This
> >> results in a refcount imbalance for nodes attached with
> >> dlpar_attach_node().  The calling sequence from dlpar_attach_node()
> >> to __of_attach_node_sysfs() is:
> >>
> >>    dlpar_attach_node()
> >>       of_attach_node()
> >>          __of_attach_node_sysfs()
> >
> > IIRC, there's a long standing item in the todo (Grant's) to convert the
> > open coded dlpar code. Maybe you want to do that first?
>
> I'd like to avoid extra delays to getting the current (with necesary
> fixes) series accepted because the series is rather intrusive and
> could have conflicts with other patches.
>
> I'm also worried that I don't have access to any of the systems that
> use the dynamic overlay code, and I don't have any way to test the
> changes.

Mainly I was thinking you are asking them to test changes now, so I
was thinking better to do that once than twice.

Either way is fine though.

> Can we encourage the users of this code to convert the open coded
> dlpar code?

That would be ideal...

Rob