[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVF337k+zyjpbzoDtWWDnYhM6eM3+As6UuZ7FCgASsMQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 08:49:44 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhiblot@...phandler.com>
Cc: saravanak@...gle.com, clement.leger@...tlin.com,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
zajec5@...il.com, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, afaerber@...e.de,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, ssantosh@...nel.org,
mathias.nyman@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] of: irq: make callers of of_irq_parse_one() release
the device node
Hi Jean-Jacques,
Thanks for your patch!
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 7:53 PM Jean-Jacques Hiblot
<jjhiblot@...phandler.com> wrote:
> of_irq_parse_one() does a get() on the device node returned in out_irq->np.
> Callers of of_irq_parse_one() must do a put() when they are done with it.
What does "be done with it" really mean here?
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhiblot@...phandler.com>
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/regulator-quirk-rcar-gen2.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/regulator-quirk-rcar-gen2.c
> @@ -184,6 +184,7 @@ static int __init rcar_gen2_regulator_quirk(void)
> kfree(quirk);
> continue;
> }
> + of_node_put(argsa->np);
The quirk object, which is a container of argsa, is still used below,
and stored in a linked list. I agree argsa->np is not dereferenced,
but the pointer itself is still compared to other pointers.
IIUIC, calling of_node_put() might cause the reference count to drop to
zero, and the underlying struct node object to be deallocated.
So when a future reference to the same DT node will be taken, a new
struct node object will be allocated, and the pointer comparison below
will fail?
Or am I missing something?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists