linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/connector: allow a .destroy callback for drmm-allocated connectors

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

Message-ID: <46ef67d65591bf18d9d9dc4f8b26ca93ed93304f@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 10:33:59 +0300
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>, Maarten Lankhorst
 <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Robert Foss
 <rfoss@...nel.org>, Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
 Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>, Jernej Skrabec
 <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Dmitry Baryshkov
 <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Hui Pu <Hui.Pu@...ealthcare.com>, Thomas Petazzoni
 <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/connector: allow a .destroy callback for
 drmm-allocated connectors

On Thu, 25 Sep 2025, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com> wrote:
> Some code is going to need connector-specific cleanup actions (namely
> drm_bridge_connector will need to put refcounted bridges).
>
> The .destroy callback is appropriate for this task but it is currently
> forbidden by drmm_connector_init(). Relax this limitation and document it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
>
> ---
>
> The other obvious approach would be adding a separate .cleanup callback for
> the cleanup-only actions. I tried both, they both apparently work, so any
> arguments and opinions on which approach is best within the overall DRM
> design would be very useful here.
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c
> index 272d6254ea4784e97ca894ec4d463beebf9fdbf0..bd0220513a23afcb096b0c4c4d2b957b81f21ee1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_connector.c
> @@ -513,7 +513,8 @@ static void drm_connector_cleanup_action(struct drm_device *dev,
>   *
>   * The connector structure should be allocated with drmm_kzalloc().
>   *
> - * The @drm_connector_funcs.destroy hook must be NULL.
> + * The @drm_connector_funcs.destroy hook must only do connector-specific
> + * cleanups if any is needed, not dealloacte the connector.

It slightly feels like a trap to have different semantics for ->destroy
depending on how the connector was allocated.

BR,
Jani.


>   *
>   * Returns:
>   * Zero on success, error code on failure.
> @@ -526,9 +527,6 @@ int drmm_connector_init(struct drm_device *dev,
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	if (drm_WARN_ON(dev, funcs && funcs->destroy))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -
>  	ret = drm_connector_init_and_add(dev, connector, funcs, connector_type, ddc);
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel