| Message ID | 1541431515-25197-1-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | of: overlay: validation checks, subsequent fixes | expand |
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:26 AM <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> > > Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing > triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect > possible memory leaks and invalid overlays. > > The checks revealed bugs in existing code. Fixed the bugs. > > While fixing bugs, noted other issues, which are fixed in > separate patches. > > ***** Powerpc folks: I was not able to test the patches that > ***** directly impact Powerpc systems that use dynamic > ***** devicetree. Please review that code carefully and > ***** test. The specific patches are: 03/16, 04/16, 07/16 I'm waiting for this to happen. Send me a pull req when it does or when you give up waiting for a response. Rob
Hi Michael, Ben, Paul, Do you know if anyone has tried this series on PowerPC? Thanks, -Frank On 11/5/18 11:24 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:26 AM <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> >> >> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing >> triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect >> possible memory leaks and invalid overlays. >> >> The checks revealed bugs in existing code. Fixed the bugs. >> >> While fixing bugs, noted other issues, which are fixed in >> separate patches. >> >> ***** Powerpc folks: I was not able to test the patches that >> ***** directly impact Powerpc systems that use dynamic >> ***** devicetree. Please review that code carefully and >> ***** test. The specific patches are: 03/16, 04/16, 07/16 > > I'm waiting for this to happen. Send me a pull req when it does or > when you give up waiting for a response. > > Rob >
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> writes: > Hi Michael, Ben, Paul, > > Do you know if anyone has tried this series on PowerPC? I have. No obvious breakage. My test does a loop of adding and removing multiple CPUs multiple times, and in the past that has uncovered refcounting bugs. So I don't think we're leaking any with this series applied. I used the tracepoint patch to keep an eye on the refcounts :) https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/751602/ I'm happy for this series to go into linux-next where it should get some more testing. cheers
On 11/7/18 4:09 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> writes: > >> Hi Michael, Ben, Paul, >> >> Do you know if anyone has tried this series on PowerPC? > > I have. No obvious breakage. > > My test does a loop of adding and removing multiple CPUs multiple times, > and in the past that has uncovered refcounting bugs. So I don't think > we're leaking any with this series applied. > > I used the tracepoint patch to keep an eye on the refcounts :) > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/751602/ > > > I'm happy for this series to go into linux-next where it should get some > more testing. > > cheers > Thanks for the reviews and testing. -Frank
From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect possible memory leaks and invalid overlays. The checks revealed bugs in existing code. Fixed the bugs. While fixing bugs, noted other issues, which are fixed in separate patches. ***** Powerpc folks: I was not able to test the patches that ***** directly impact Powerpc systems that use dynamic ***** devicetree. Please review that code carefully and ***** test. The specific patches are: 03/16, 04/16, 07/16 FPGA folks: I made the validation checks that should result in an invalid live devicetree report "ERROR" and cause the overlay apply to fail. I made the memory leak validation tests report "WARNING" and allow the overlay apply to complete successfully. Please let me know if you encounter the warnings. There are at least two paths forward to deal with the cases that trigger the warning: (1) change the warning to an error and fail the overlay apply, or (2) find a way to detect the potential memory leaks and free the memory appropriately. ALL people: The validations do _not_ address another major concern I have with releasing overlays, which is use after free errors. Changes since v5: - move from 4.19-rc1 to 4.20-rc1 - all patches: add tested-by Alan Tull - 05/18: update for context change from commit a613b26a50136 ("of: Convert to using %pOFn instead of device_node.name") Changes since v4: - 01/18: make error message format consistent, error first, path last - 09/18: create of_prop_val_eq() and change open code to use it - 09/18: remove extra blank lines Changes since v3: - 01/18: Add expected value of refcount for destroy cset entry error. Also explain the cause of the error. - 09/18: for errors of an overlay changing the value of #size-cells or #address-cells, return -EINVAL so that overlay apply will fail - 09/18: for errors of an overlay changing the value of #size-cells or #address-cells, make the message more direct. Old message: OF: overlay: ERROR: overlay and/or live tree #size-cells invalid in node /soc/base_fpga_region New message: OF: overlay: ERROR: changing value of /soc/base_fpga_region/#size-cells not allowed - 13/18: Update patch comment header to state that this patch modifies the previous patch to not return immediately on fragment error and explain this is not a performance issue. - 13/18: remove redundant "overlay" from two error messages. "OF: overlay:" is already present in pr_fmt() Changes since v2: - 13/18: Use continue to reduce indentation in find_dup_cset_node_entry() and find_dup_cset_prop() Changes since v1: - move patch 16/16 to 17/18 - move patch 15/16 to 18/18 - new patch 15/18 - new patch 16/18 - 05/18: add_changeset_node() header comment: incorrect comment for @target - 18/18: add same fix for of_parse_phandle_with_args() - 18/18: add same fix for of_parse_phandle_with_args_map() Frank Rowand (18): of: overlay: add tests to validate kfrees from overlay removal of: overlay: add missing of_node_put() after add new node to changeset of: overlay: add missing of_node_get() in __of_attach_node_sysfs powerpc/pseries: add of_node_put() in dlpar_detach_node() of: overlay: use prop add changeset entry for property in new nodes of: overlay: do not duplicate properties from overlay for new nodes of: dynamic: change type of of_{at,de}tach_node() to void of: overlay: reorder fields in struct fragment of: overlay: validate overlay properties #address-cells and #size-cells of: overlay: make all pr_debug() and pr_err() messages unique of: overlay: test case of two fragments adding same node of: overlay: check prevents multiple fragments add or delete same node of: overlay: check prevents multiple fragments touching same property of: unittest: remove unused of_unittest_apply_overlay() argument of: overlay: set node fields from properties when add new overlay node of: unittest: allow base devicetree to have symbol metadata of: unittest: find overlays[] entry by name instead of index of: unittest: initialize args before calling of_*parse_*() arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/dlpar.c | 15 +- arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/reconfig.c | 6 +- drivers/of/dynamic.c | 68 +++-- drivers/of/kobj.c | 4 +- drivers/of/overlay.c | 292 ++++++++++++++++----- drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile | 2 + .../of/unittest-data/overlay_bad_add_dup_node.dts | 28 ++ .../of/unittest-data/overlay_bad_add_dup_prop.dts | 24 ++ drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts | 1 + drivers/of/unittest.c | 96 +++++-- include/linux/of.h | 25 +- 11 files changed, 439 insertions(+), 122 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_bad_add_dup_node.dts create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_bad_add_dup_prop.dts