[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190329100202.rupu5xo2prxlcafa@M43218.corp.atmel.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 11:02:02 +0100
From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
To: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@....com.cn>
CC: <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>, <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm/mach-at91/pm : fix possible object reference leak
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 10:55:46PM +0800, Peng Hao wrote:
> of_find_device_by_node() takes a reference to the struct device
> when it finds a match via get_device. When returning error we should
> call put_device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@....com.cn>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> index 51e808a..70fadb7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> @@ -621,6 +621,7 @@ static int __init at91_pm_backup_init(void)
>
> securam_fail:
> iounmap(pm_data.sfrbu);
> + put_device(&pdev->dev);
Fixed in this way, in some cases (as there are goto securam_fail before calling
of_find_device_by_node), we may decrement a reference which has not been
incremented. Is it safe?
Regards
Ludovic
> pm_data.sfrbu = NULL;
> return ret;
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists