[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <64ac3dc9.5bd1.18170bcb6a6.Coremail.windhl@126.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 16:17:04 +0800 (CST)
From: "Liang He" <windhl@....com>
To: "Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"Conor.Dooley" <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc: "oss@...error.net" <oss@...error.net>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH v4] powerpc:85xx: Add missing of_node_put() in
sgy_cst1000
At 2022-06-17 14:53:13, "Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> wrote:
>
>
>Le 17/06/2022 à 08:45, Liang He a écrit :
>>
>>
>>
>> At 2022-06-17 14:28:56, "Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 17/06/2022 à 08:08, Liang He a écrit :
>>>> In gpio_halt_probe(), of_find_matching_node() will return a node
>>>> pointer with refcount incremented. We should use of_node_put() in
>>>> fail path or when it is not used anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@....com>
>>>> ---
>>>> changelog:
>>>> v4: reuse exist 'err' and use a simple code style, advised by CJ
>>>> v3: use local 'child_node' advised by Michael.
>>>> v2: use goto-label patch style advised by Christophe Leroy.
>>>> v1: add of_node_put() before each exit.
>>>>
>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c | 35 ++++++++++++++---------
>>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c
>>>> index 98ae64075193..e4588943fe7e 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c
>>>> @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> {
>>>> enum of_gpio_flags flags;
>>>> struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
>>>> + struct device_node *child_node;
>>>> int gpio, err, irq;
>>>> int trigger;
>>>>
>>>> @@ -78,26 +79,29 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> return -ENODEV;
>>>>
>>>> /* If there's no matching child, this isn't really an error */
>>>> - halt_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match);
>>>> - if (!halt_node)
>>>> + child_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match);
>>>> + if (!child_node)
>>>> return 0;
>>>>
>>>> /* Technically we could just read the first one, but punish
>>>> * DT writers for invalid form. */
>>>> - if (of_gpio_count(halt_node) != 1)
>>>> - return -EINVAL;
>>>> + if (of_gpio_count(child_node) != 1) {
>>>> + err = -EINVAL;
>>>> + goto err_put;
>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> /* Get the gpio number relative to the dynamic base. */
>>>> - gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(halt_node, 0, &flags);
>>>> - if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio))
>>>> - return -EINVAL;
>>>> + gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(child_node, 0, &flags);
>>>> + if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) {
>>>> + err = -EINVAL;
>>>> + gotot err_put;
>>>
>>> Did you test the build ?
>>
>> Sorry for this fault.
>>
>> In fact, I am still finding an efficient way to building different arch source code as I only have x86-64.
>>
>> Now I am try using QEMU.
>>
>> Anyway, sorry for this fault.
>
>You can find cross compilers for most architectures for x86-64 here :
>https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/
>
>Christophe
Hi, Christophe and Conor.
Sorry to trouble you again.
Now I only know how to quickly identify the refcounting bugs, but I cannot efficiently give a build test.
For example, I use the cross compilers 'powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc' to compile 'arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c' with -fsyntax-only flag.
But I meet too many header file missing errors. Even if I add some 'include' pathes, e.g., ./arch/powerpc/include, ./include,
there are still too many other errors.
So if there is any efficient way to check my patch code to avoid 'gotot' error again.
Thanks again, Christophe and Conor.
Liang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists