linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: ppc_cbe: fix possible object reference leak

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]

Date:   Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:50:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc:     Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: ppc_cbe: fix possible object reference
 leak



On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:

> > The call to of_get_cpu_node returns a node pointer with refcount
> > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > usage.
>
> I would prefer a wording like the following.
>
> A reference counter was incremented for a CPU node by a call of
> the function “of_get_cpu_node”.
> Thus decrement it after the last usage.

The original log message seems perfectly clear.

>
>
> > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
>
> I wonder about the shown duplicate notification.
> Can a single message be sufficient for the code search result
> in this source file?

Since you have removed the context, I have no idea what you are talking
about.

julia