[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <581fb060128519d29c06f797ee8ec7c8d0e60ca0.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 11:25:09 +0100
From: Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com>
To: Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
<rafael@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand
<frowand.list@...il.com>, Lizhi Hou <lizhi.hou@....com>, Max Zhen
<max.zhen@....com>, Sonal Santan <sonal.santan@....com>, Stefano Stabellini
<stefano.stabellini@...inx.com>, Jonathan Cameron
<Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Allan Nielsen <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>,
Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>, Steen Hegelund
<steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] of: overlay: Synchronize of_overlay_remove()
with the devlink removals
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 11:14 +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:50:21 +0100
> Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 09:39 +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> > > In the following sequence:
> > > 1) of_platform_depopulate()
> > > 2) of_overlay_remove()
> > >
> > > During the step 1, devices are destroyed and devlinks are removed.
> > > During the step 2, OF nodes are destroyed but
> > > __of_changeset_entry_destroy() can raise warnings related to missing
> > > of_node_put():
> > > ERROR: memory leak, expected refcount 1 instead of 2 ...
> > >
> > > Indeed, during the devlink removals performed at step 1, the removal
> > > itself releasing the device (and the attached of_node) is done by a job
> > > queued in a workqueue and so, it is done asynchronously with respect to
> > > function calls.
> > > When the warning is present, of_node_put() will be called but wrongly
> > > too late from the workqueue job.
> > >
> > > In order to be sure that any ongoing devlink removals are done before
> > > the of_node destruction, synchronize the of_overlay_remove() with the
> > > devlink removals.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 80dd33cf72d1 ("drivers: base: Fix device link removal")
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/of/overlay.c | 9 ++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/of/overlay.c b/drivers/of/overlay.c
> > > index 2ae7e9d24a64..99659ae9fb28 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/of/overlay.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/of/overlay.c
> >
> > In the cover, you mention device.h inclusion but I'm not seeing it? This is
> > clearly up to the DT maintainers to decide but, IMHO, I would very much
> > prefer
> > to see fwnode.h included in here rather than directly device.h (so yeah,
> > renaming the function to fwnode_*). But yeah, I might be biased by own
> > series :)
> >
>
> Damned. I missed device.h in this patch.
> Without this one, the patch do not compile :(
>
> A fixup commit I missed to squash before sending.
>
> A v3 is planned to add this device.h.
>
> Nuno, do you prefer I wait few days before sending this v3 waiting for more
> replies
> or I send it right now and you re-do your comment on the v3 ?
>
> I would really prefer to send it now :)
>
Typically maintainers don't like much of re-spinning versions too fast. That
said, up to you :). I can copy paste my comments in v3.
- Nuno Sá
Powered by blists - more mailing lists