[01/15] ARM: actions: fix a leaked reference by addingmissing of_node_put
diff mbox series

Message ID 1551430616-42014-1-git-send-email-wen.yang99@zte.com.cn
State New
Headers show
Series
  • [01/15] ARM: actions: fix a leaked reference by addingmissing of_node_put
Related show

Commit Message

Wen Yang March 1, 2019, 8:56 a.m. UTC
The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
usage.

Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.

Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>
Cc: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
 arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Comments

Manivannan Sadhasivam March 1, 2019, 3:55 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Wen,

On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> usage.
> 
> Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> 

We have a floating patch for this:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html

Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted by Linus
Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?

Thanks,
Mani

> Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>
> Cc: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
> Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
> index 4fd479c..1a8e078 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
> @@ -107,6 +107,7 @@ static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
>  	}
>  
>  	timer_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	of_node_put(node);
>  	if (!timer_base_addr) {
>  		pr_err("%s: could not map timer registers\n", __func__);
>  		return;
> @@ -119,6 +120,7 @@ static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
>  	}
>  
>  	sps_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +	of_node_put(node);
>  	if (!sps_base_addr) {
>  		pr_err("%s: could not map sps registers\n", __func__);
>  		return;
> @@ -132,6 +134,7 @@ static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
>  		}
>  
>  		scu_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
> +		of_node_put(node);
>  		if (!scu_base_addr) {
>  			pr_err("%s: could not map scu registers\n", __func__);
>  			return;
> -- 
> 2.9.5
>
Linus Walleij March 4, 2019, 12:29 p.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Wen,
>
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > usage.
> >
> > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> >
>
> We have a floating patch for this:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html
>
> Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted by Linus
> Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?

Andreas wrote a version of simplifying secondary startup in the
same spirit as Russell's patches, and it's merged and all
is fine I think.

If this patch applied on top of the current upstream code I'd say
just forget about my patch and merge Wen's patch instead.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
Manivannan Sadhasivam March 4, 2019, 2:48 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi Linus,

On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 01:29:33PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
> <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Hi Wen,
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > > usage.
> > >
> > > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > >
> >
> > We have a floating patch for this:
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html
> >
> > Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted by Linus
> > Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?
> 
> Andreas wrote a version of simplifying secondary startup in the
> same spirit as Russell's patches, and it's merged and all
> is fine I think.
> 

Oops. I think I missed that! Can you please point me to that patch? And how it
got merged? I did the PR for actions stuff this time and haven't included any
mach-actions patches.

Thanks,
Mani

> If this patch applied on top of the current upstream code I'd say
> just forget about my patch and merge Wen's patch instead.
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
Linus Walleij March 4, 2019, 10:37 p.m. UTC | #4
On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 3:48 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 01:29:33PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
> > <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Wen,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > > > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > > > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > > > usage.
> > > >
> > > > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > >
> > >
> > > We have a floating patch for this:
> > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html
> > >
> > > Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted by Linus
> > > Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?
> >
> > Andreas wrote a version of simplifying secondary startup in the
> > same spirit as Russell's patches, and it's merged and all
> > is fine I think.
> >
>
> Oops. I think I missed that! Can you please point me to that patch? And how it
> got merged? I did the PR for actions stuff this time and haven't included any
> mach-actions patches.

I just did git log arch/arm/mach-actions but I think it came in quite some time
ago, not last merge window:

But you see:
commit 6c2eb3e76fb84e2eb46d484f71fab469c0d9532c
"ARM: owl: smp: Drop owl_secondary_boot()"
commit bad29933fef76fb6ee577f4a0b6d145c1f52f663
"ARM: owl: smp: Use __pa_symbol()"
commit 18cfd9429d8a82c49add8f3ca9d366599bfcac45
"ARM: owl: smp: Drop bogus holding pen"

platsmp.c looks just fine these days. Except for what Wei's patch is fixing,
of_node_put().

Yours,
Linus Walleij
Russell King - ARM Linux admin March 5, 2019, 9:55 a.m. UTC | #5
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 07:21:19AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar, 2019, 4:08 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 3:48 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
> > <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 01:29:33PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 4:55 PM Manivannan Sadhasivam
> > > > <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Wen,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > > > > > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > > > > > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > > > > > usage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > > > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing
> > of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103,
> > but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing
> > of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115,
> > but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > > > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing
> > of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128,
> > but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We have a floating patch for this:
> > > > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg694544.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Andreas: Can you please take a second look at the patchset submitted
> > by Linus
> > > > > Walleij and Russel for simplifying the Actions startup code?
> > > >
> > > > Andreas wrote a version of simplifying secondary startup in the
> > > > same spirit as Russell's patches, and it's merged and all
> > > > is fine I think.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Oops. I think I missed that! Can you please point me to that patch? And
> > how it
> > > got merged? I did the PR for actions stuff this time and haven't
> > included any
> > > mach-actions patches.
> >
> > I just did git log arch/arm/mach-actions but I think it came in quite some
> > time
> > ago, not last merge window:
> >
> > But you see:
> > commit 6c2eb3e76fb84e2eb46d484f71fab469c0d9532c
> > "ARM: owl: smp: Drop owl_secondary_boot()"
> > commit bad29933fef76fb6ee577f4a0b6d145c1f52f663
> > "ARM: owl: smp: Use __pa_symbol()"
> > commit 18cfd9429d8a82c49add8f3ca9d366599bfcac45
> > "ARM: owl: smp: Drop bogus holding pen"
> >
> > platsmp.c looks just fine these days. Except for what Wei's patch is
> > fixing,
> > of_node_put().
> >
> 
> Nope. platsmp.c still requires some cleanup like removing the redundant
> bootlock and pen_release flag as pointed out by Russel. Andreas just
> replied to your cleanup patches but there was no follow up since that. So,
> I guess we can just apply Russell's patches and this patch once Andreas is
> fine with it (it looks good to me though).

No.  My patches are in my tree queued for this merge window.  They
are part of a series that can not be broken up and merged separately
because all the per-platform patches need to be merged before the final
patch "ARM: smp: remove arch-provided "pen_release"" otherwise the
platforms break.  I thought that was already explained.

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
index 4fd479c..1a8e078 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c
@@ -107,6 +107,7 @@  static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
 	}
 
 	timer_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
+	of_node_put(node);
 	if (!timer_base_addr) {
 		pr_err("%s: could not map timer registers\n", __func__);
 		return;
@@ -119,6 +120,7 @@  static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
 	}
 
 	sps_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
+	of_node_put(node);
 	if (!sps_base_addr) {
 		pr_err("%s: could not map sps registers\n", __func__);
 		return;
@@ -132,6 +134,7 @@  static void __init s500_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
 		}
 
 		scu_base_addr = of_iomap(node, 0);
+		of_node_put(node);
 		if (!scu_base_addr) {
 			pr_err("%s: could not map scu registers\n", __func__);
 			return;