[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <69e7e81b.8204.18172113f39.Coremail.windhl@126.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 22:29:01 +0800 (CST)
From: "Liang He" <windhl@....com>
To: "Christophe JAILLET" <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc: mpe@...erman.id.au, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
nick.child@....com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH] powerpc: powernv: Fix refcount leak bug in
opal-powercap
At 2022-06-17 13:01:27, "Christophe JAILLET" <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:
>Le 17/06/2022 à 06:20, Liang He a écrit :
>> In opal_powercap_init(), of_find_compatible_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.
>>
>> Besides, for_each_child_of_node() will automatically *inc* and *dec*
>> refcount during iteration. However, we should add the of_node_put()
>> if there is a break.
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm not sure that your patch is right here. Because of this *inc* and
>*dec* things, do we still need to of_node_put(powercap) once we have
>entered for_each_child_of_node?
>
>I think that this reference will be released on the first iteration of
>the loop.
>
>
>Maybe of_node_put(powercap) should be duplicated everywhere it is
>relevant and removed from the error handling path?
>Or an additional reference should be taken before the loop?
>Or adding a new label with "powercap = NULL" and branching there when
>needed?
>
>CJ
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@....com>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-powercap.c | 5 ++++-
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-powercap.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-powercap.c
>> index 64506b46e77b..b102477d3f95 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-powercap.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-powercap.c
>> @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ void __init opal_powercap_init(void)
>> pcaps = kcalloc(of_get_child_count(powercap), sizeof(*pcaps),
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!pcaps)
>> - return;
>> + goto out_powercap;
>>
>> powercap_kobj = kobject_create_and_add("powercap", opal_kobj);
>> if (!powercap_kobj) {
>> @@ -236,6 +236,9 @@ void __init opal_powercap_init(void)
>> kfree(pcaps[i].pg.name);
>> }
>> kobject_put(powercap_kobj);
>> + of_node_put(node);
>> out_pcaps:
>> kfree(pcaps);
>> +out_powercap:
>> + of_node_put(powercap);
>> }
Hi, CJ.
I think my patch is correct based on the old commit:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?h=v5.19-rc2&id=09700c504d8e63faffd2a2235074e8c5d130cb8f
Bugs and fix solutions in this 09700c504d8e63-commit are very similar with mine.
Besides, I also find similar new bugs in other two files in the same directory 'powernv',
so I have merged all three files' patches into one commit. '[PATCH v2] powerpc: powernv: Fix refcount leak bug'.
Thanks.
Liang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists