linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/15] ARM: actions: fix a leaked reference by addingmissing of_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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CACRpkdb=E9_rm4_7DQV3dS5uOs1gozxEwN9MtWr0tTwmjcYe=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Mar 2019 13:29:33 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc:     Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>,
        Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
        Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
        Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
        avifishman70@...il.com, Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>,
        Patrick Venture <venture@...gle.com>,
        Nancy Yuen <yuenn@...gle.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Xu Wei <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
        Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>, wang.yi59@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] ARM: actions: fix a leaked reference by
 addingmissing of_node_put

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> Hi Wen,
>
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > usage.
> >
> > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> >
>
> We have a floating patch for this:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html
>
> Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted by Linus
> Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?

Andreas wrote a version of simplifying secondary startup in the
same spirit as Russell's patches, and it's merged and all
is fine I think.

If this patch applied on top of the current upstream code I'd say
just forget about my patch and merge Wen's patch instead.

Yours,
Linus Walleij