linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: sirf: Add missing put_device() call in sirfsoc_gpio

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:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:12:21 +0800
From:   "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Yi Zhang" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: sirf: Add missing put_device() call in
 sirfsoc_gpio_probe()

On 2020/6/3 2:56, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> in sirfsoc_gpio_probe(), if of_find_device_by_node() succeed,
>> put_device() is missing in the error handling patch.
> 
> How do you think about another wording variant?
> 
>     A coccicheck run provided information like the following.
> 
>     drivers/pinctrl/sirf/pinctrl-sirf.c:798:2-8: ERROR: missing put_device;
>     call of_find_device_by_node on line 792, but without a corresponding
>     object release within this function.
> 
>     Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/free/put_device.cocci
> 
>     Thus add a jump target to fix the exception handling for this
>     function implementation.
> 
> 
> Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message?
> 
Will do, thanks for your advise!

Yu Kuai