linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cpufreq: tegra186: add OPP support and set bandwidth

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5ind7yevxsrsd3ws5rkl5z3zuxw4yrqoclqg7q6beunc6kgr2n@qmgbgw5q2ltc>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 10:38:40 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@...il.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>, 
	Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cpufreq: tegra186: add OPP support and set
 bandwidth

On 12-10-25, 21:32, Aaron Kling wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 5:30 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 09-09-25, 01:21, Aaron Kling via B4 Relay wrote:
> > > +static int tegra_cpufreq_set_bw(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned long freq_khz)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct tegra186_cpufreq_data *data = cpufreq_get_driver_data();
> > > +     struct dev_pm_opp *opp __free(put_opp);
> >
> > The usage here looks incorrect..
> >
> > > +     struct device *dev;
> > > +     int ret;
> > > +
> > > +     dev = get_cpu_device(policy->cpu);
> > > +     if (!dev)
> > > +             return -ENODEV;
> >
> > On failure, we would return from here with a garbage `opp` pointer, which the
> > OPP core may try to free ?
> >
> > Moving the variable definition here would fix that.
> 
> If the var was NULL initialized, would the free handle that correctly?
> Keeping the declarations at the start of the function reads better
> imo.

include/linux/cleanup.h has some recommendations around that.

-- 
viresh