linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: pm: add missing put_device() call in at91_pm_sram

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: <01fd6279-524e-3cee-4c16-5b748a49d0f0@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Jul 2020 09:15:20 +0800
From:   "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
CC:     <linux@...linux.org.uk>, <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: pm: add missing put_device() call in
 at91_pm_sram_init()


On 2020/7/3 4:09, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 04/06/2020 20:33:01+0800, yu kuai wrote:
>> if of_find_device_by_node() succeed, at91_pm_sram_init() doesn't have
>> a corresponding put_device(). Thus add a jump target to fix the exception
>> handling for this function implementation.
>>
>> Fixes: d2e467905596 ("ARM: at91: pm: use the mmio-sram pool to access SRAM")
>> Signed-off-by: yu kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 11 ++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
>> index 074bde64064e..2aab043441e8 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
>> @@ -592,13 +592,13 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void)
>>   	sram_pool = gen_pool_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> 
> Isn't the best solution to simply have put_device hereHi, Alexandre !

I think put_device() is supposed to be called in the exception handling
path.

> 
>>   	if (!sram_pool) {
>>   		pr_warn("%s: sram pool unavailable!\n", __func__);
>> -		return;
>> +		goto out_put_device;
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	sram_base = gen_pool_alloc(sram_pool, at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz);
>>   	if (!sram_base) {
>>   		pr_warn("%s: unable to alloc sram!\n", __func__);
>> -		return;
>> +		goto out_put_device;
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	sram_pbase = gen_pool_virt_to_phys(sram_pool, sram_base);
>> @@ -606,12 +606,17 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void)
>>   					at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz, false);
>>   	if (!at91_suspend_sram_fn) {
>>   		pr_warn("SRAM: Could not map\n");
>> -		return;
>> +		goto out_put_device;
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	/* Copy the pm suspend handler to SRAM */
>>   	at91_suspend_sram_fn = fncpy(at91_suspend_sram_fn,
>>   			&at91_pm_suspend_in_sram, at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz);

If nothing is wrong, maybe put_device shounld't be called?

Thanks!
Yu Kuai
>> +	return;
>> +
>> +out_put_device:
>> +	put_device(&pdev->dev);
>> +	return;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static bool __init at91_is_pm_mode_active(int pm_mode)
>> -- 
>> 2.25.4
>>
>