Message ID | 20220617052214.4004188-1-windhl@126.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | [v3] powerpc:85xx: Add missing of_node_put() in sgy_cst1000 | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
snowpatch_ozlabs/github-powerpc_selftests | success | Successfully ran 10 jobs. |
snowpatch_ozlabs/github-powerpc_ppctests | success | Successfully ran 10 jobs. |
snowpatch_ozlabs/github-powerpc_clang | success | Successfully ran 7 jobs. |
snowpatch_ozlabs/github-powerpc_sparse | success | Successfully ran 4 jobs. |
snowpatch_ozlabs/github-powerpc_kernel_qemu | success | Successfully ran 23 jobs. |
Le 17/06/2022 à 07:22, Liang He a écrit : > In gpio_halt_probe(), of_find_matching_node() will return a node > pointer with refcount incremented. We should use of_node_put() in > fail path or when it is not used anymore. > > Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@126.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c | 39 +++++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c > index 98ae64075193..a8690fc552cf 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c > @@ -71,33 +71,39 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > enum of_gpio_flags flags; > struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node; > + struct device_node *child_node; > int gpio, err, irq; > int trigger; > + int ret; > > if (!node) > return -ENODEV; > > /* If there's no matching child, this isn't really an error */ > - halt_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); > - if (!halt_node) > + child_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); > + if (!child_node) > return 0; > > /* Technically we could just read the first one, but punish > * DT writers for invalid form. */ > - if (of_gpio_count(halt_node) != 1) > - return -EINVAL; > + if (of_gpio_count(child_node) != 1) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto err_put; > + } > > /* Get the gpio number relative to the dynamic base. */ > - gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(halt_node, 0, &flags); > - if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) > - return -EINVAL; > + gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(child_node, 0, &flags); > + if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + gotot err_put; > + } > > err = gpio_request(gpio, "gpio-halt"); > if (err) { > printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting GPIO %d.\n", > gpio); > - halt_node = NULL; > - return err; > + ret = err; Sorry for not seeing and asking before, but why do you need 'ret'? Can't you use the existing 'err' in place in this whole patch? > + goto err_put; > } > > trigger = (flags == OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW); > @@ -105,15 +111,15 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > gpio_direction_output(gpio, !trigger); > > /* Now get the IRQ which tells us when the power button is hit */ > - irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(halt_node, 0); > + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(child_node, 0); > err = request_irq(irq, gpio_halt_irq, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | > - IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", halt_node); > + IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", child_node); > if (err) { > printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting IRQ %d for " > "GPIO %d.\n", irq, gpio); > gpio_free(gpio); > - halt_node = NULL; > - return err; > + ret = err; > + goto err_put; > } > > /* Register our halt function */ > @@ -122,8 +128,12 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > printk(KERN_INFO "gpio-halt: registered GPIO %d (%d trigger, %d" > " irq).\n", gpio, trigger, irq); > + ret = 0; > + halt_node = of_node_get(child_node); LGTM, but my preferred style would be: halt_node = child_node; return 0; I'm not a maintainer, so this is just my opinion and it is mostly a mater of taste. CJ > > - return 0; > +err_put: > + of_node_put(child_node); > + return ret; > } > > static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > @@ -139,6 +149,7 @@ static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > > gpio_free(gpio); > > + of_node_put(halt_node); > halt_node = NULL; > } >
At 2022-06-17 13:37:12, "Christophe JAILLET" <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >Le 17/06/2022 à 07:22, Liang He a écrit : >> In gpio_halt_probe(), of_find_matching_node() will return a node >> pointer with refcount incremented. We should use of_node_put() in >> fail path or when it is not used anymore. >> >> Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@126.com> >> --- >> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c | 39 +++++++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c >> index 98ae64075193..a8690fc552cf 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c >> @@ -71,33 +71,39 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> { >> enum of_gpio_flags flags; >> struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node; >> + struct device_node *child_node; >> int gpio, err, irq; >> int trigger; >> + int ret; >> >> if (!node) >> return -ENODEV; >> >> /* If there's no matching child, this isn't really an error */ >> - halt_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); >> - if (!halt_node) >> + child_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); >> + if (!child_node) >> return 0; >> >> /* Technically we could just read the first one, but punish >> * DT writers for invalid form. */ >> - if (of_gpio_count(halt_node) != 1) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + if (of_gpio_count(child_node) != 1) { >> + ret = -EINVAL; >> + goto err_put; >> + } >> >> /* Get the gpio number relative to the dynamic base. */ >> - gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(halt_node, 0, &flags); >> - if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(child_node, 0, &flags); >> + if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) { >> + ret = -EINVAL; >> + gotot err_put; >> + } >> >> err = gpio_request(gpio, "gpio-halt"); >> if (err) { >> printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting GPIO %d.\n", >> gpio); >> - halt_node = NULL; >> - return err; >> + ret = err; > >Sorry for not seeing and asking before, but why do you need 'ret'? >Can't you use the existing 'err' in place in this whole patch? > Thanks, CJ. Your advice is good and I have not noticed the 'err'. >> + goto err_put; >> } >> >> trigger = (flags == OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW); >> @@ -105,15 +111,15 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> gpio_direction_output(gpio, !trigger); >> >> /* Now get the IRQ which tells us when the power button is hit */ >> - irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(halt_node, 0); >> + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(child_node, 0); >> err = request_irq(irq, gpio_halt_irq, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | >> - IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", halt_node); >> + IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", child_node); >> if (err) { >> printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting IRQ %d for " >> "GPIO %d.\n", irq, gpio); >> gpio_free(gpio); >> - halt_node = NULL; >> - return err; >> + ret = err; >> + goto err_put; >> } >> >> /* Register our halt function */ >> @@ -122,8 +128,12 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> printk(KERN_INFO "gpio-halt: registered GPIO %d (%d trigger, %d" >> " irq).\n", gpio, trigger, irq); >> + ret = 0; >> + halt_node = of_node_get(child_node); > >LGTM, but my preferred style would be: > halt_node = child_node; > return 0; >I'm not a maintainer, so this is just my opinion and it is mostly a >mater of taste. > >CJ Thanks, CJ. Now, I also prefer this style and I will use it. > >> >> - return 0; >> +err_put: >> + of_node_put(child_node); >> + return ret; >> } >> >> static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> @@ -139,6 +149,7 @@ static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> gpio_free(gpio); >> >> + of_node_put(halt_node); >> halt_node = NULL; >> } >>
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c index 98ae64075193..a8690fc552cf 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c @@ -71,33 +71,39 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { enum of_gpio_flags flags; struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node; + struct device_node *child_node; int gpio, err, irq; int trigger; + int ret; if (!node) return -ENODEV; /* If there's no matching child, this isn't really an error */ - halt_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); - if (!halt_node) + child_node = of_find_matching_node(node, child_match); + if (!child_node) return 0; /* Technically we could just read the first one, but punish * DT writers for invalid form. */ - if (of_gpio_count(halt_node) != 1) - return -EINVAL; + if (of_gpio_count(child_node) != 1) { + ret = -EINVAL; + goto err_put; + } /* Get the gpio number relative to the dynamic base. */ - gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(halt_node, 0, &flags); - if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) - return -EINVAL; + gpio = of_get_gpio_flags(child_node, 0, &flags); + if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) { + ret = -EINVAL; + gotot err_put; + } err = gpio_request(gpio, "gpio-halt"); if (err) { printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting GPIO %d.\n", gpio); - halt_node = NULL; - return err; + ret = err; + goto err_put; } trigger = (flags == OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW); @@ -105,15 +111,15 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) gpio_direction_output(gpio, !trigger); /* Now get the IRQ which tells us when the power button is hit */ - irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(halt_node, 0); + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(child_node, 0); err = request_irq(irq, gpio_halt_irq, IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | - IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", halt_node); + IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, "gpio-halt", child_node); if (err) { printk(KERN_ERR "gpio-halt: error requesting IRQ %d for " "GPIO %d.\n", irq, gpio); gpio_free(gpio); - halt_node = NULL; - return err; + ret = err; + goto err_put; } /* Register our halt function */ @@ -122,8 +128,12 @@ static int gpio_halt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) printk(KERN_INFO "gpio-halt: registered GPIO %d (%d trigger, %d" " irq).\n", gpio, trigger, irq); + ret = 0; + halt_node = of_node_get(child_node); - return 0; +err_put: + of_node_put(child_node); + return ret; } static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) @@ -139,6 +149,7 @@ static int gpio_halt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) gpio_free(gpio); + of_node_put(halt_node); halt_node = NULL; }
In gpio_halt_probe(), of_find_matching_node() will return a node pointer with refcount incremented. We should use of_node_put() in fail path or when it is not used anymore. Signed-off-by: Liang He <windhl@126.com> --- arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/sgy_cts1000.c | 39 +++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)