linux-kernel - Re:Re: [PATCH] memory/tegra: Add missing of_node_get() in tegra_emc_find_node_by_ram

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:20:33 +0800 (CST)
From:   "Liang He" <windhl@....com>
To:     "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re: [PATCH] memory/tegra: Add missing of_node_get() in
 tegra_emc_find_node_by_ram_code




At 2022-06-22 17:08:32, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>On 22/06/2022 10:49, Liang He wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> At 2022-06-22 16:41:28, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>>> On 22/06/2022 06:28, Liang He wrote:
>>>> of_find_node_by_name() will decrease the refcount of its first arg and
>>>> we need to add a of_node_put() to keep refcount balance.
>>>>
>>>> Besides, during the 'for' loop execution, the refcount of 'np' will be
>>>> automatically increased and decreased. There is no need to call
>>>> of_node_put() again.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@....com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/memory/tegra/tegra20-emc.c | 3 ++-
>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> The patch was not even compiled... I consider it harmful approach. NAK.
>>> See: https://lwn.net/Articles/854645/
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>> 
>> Sorry, Krzysztof.
>> 
>> As the patch is so simple two lines , I thought I can handle it without compiling it.
>> 
>> Thanks very much for your notice about the article and I hope I have not done anyother harmful things.
>> 
>> And I will take care of my patch code in future no matter how simple it is.
>
>
>Never send patches which were not built. It seems you didn't build them
>in the past either, even though setting up cross compile is trivial (few
>commands). QEMU is also an easy option.
>
>Even though your contribution might be valuable, lack of building is a
>sign for me that approach is not serious, so I am not going to take
>risky code.
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof

Thanks, Krzysztof.

This a valuable lesson for me. 

Last few days, I just want to report the bugs as quickly as I can.

And I only focus the bugs I found but not the patch compiling problem.

Yes, I admit this approach (way) is not serious and this is my fault, sorry again and sorry to waste your time.

From now on, I will not send any new patch commit before I compile the patch code.

Sorry for my behavior.