linux-kernel - Re: soundwire: fix usages of device_get_named_child

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <a2036c46-0527-4ac3-a40b-c9c2cd3e185e@web.de>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 18:22:23 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
 Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
 Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Bard Liao <bard.liao@...el.com>,
 Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: soundwire: fix usages of device_get_named_child_node()

>>> Add fwnode_handle_put() to avoid leaked references.
>>
>> Are you going to respond also to my previous patch review
>> in more constructive ways?
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/eb15ab0a-e416-4ae9-98bb-610fdc04492c@web.de/
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2024/4/29/493
>
> Sorry about that, both Bard and I missed your comments.

How could this happen?


> On the Fixes tag: I made a deliberate choice to add all the fixes in one
> patch, to show that the usage was copy-pasted and done 'wrong' in
> multiple places. That makes it really hard to add a Fixes tag since the
> different uses were added in a time interval of about 5 years.

Is it interesting how the affected software components evolved in the meantime?


> We could split and have multiple patches if that was desired, but I
> would still not include a Fixes tag since the leaked references are not
> that bad, we read the Manager properties on probe, and the peripheral
> properties are generally not used by codec drivers, so it's unlikely
> that any user will ever see a problem that requires a backport in linux-stable.
…

I became curious how the exception handling will be completed here.

* Do you still care for the usage of goto chains?
  https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/MEM12-C.+Consider+using+a+goto+chain+when+leaving+a+function+on+error+when+using+and+releasing+resources

* How do you think about to increase the application of scope-based resource management?
  https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc1/source/include/linux/cleanup.h#L124


Regards,
Markus