All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: broonie@kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: Fix warning Bad of_node_put()
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:29:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180716132931.GA866@centauri.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180716120134.GL10204@localhost>

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:01:34PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Hi Niklas,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 01:35:22PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > For of_find_node_by_name(), you typically pass what the previous call
> > returned. Therefore, of_find_node_by_name() increases the refcount of
> > the returned node, and decreases the refcount of the node passed as the
> > first argument.
> > 
> > However, in this case we don't pass what the previous call returned,
> > so we have to increase the refcount of the first argument to compensate.
> 
> I don't think this is the right fix. of_find_node_by_name() should
> generally not be used by drivers in the first place as it searches the
> entire tree and can end up matching an entirely unrelated node.
> 
> I haven't looked at the device-tree binding in question, but you
> probably want to use something like of_get_child_by_name() instead.
> 

Hello Johan,

of_find_node_by_name() will only search the whole tree if the
first argument is NULL, which isn't the case here.

However, of_get_child_by_name() is indeed better suited here.
Will send out a v2.

Thank you for your feedback, it is much appreciated :)

Kind regards,
Niklas

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-16 13:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-16 11:35 [PATCH 0/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: fix Bad of_node_put() splat Niklas Cassel
2018-07-16 11:35 ` [PATCH 1/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: Fix warning Bad of_node_put() Niklas Cassel
2018-07-16 12:01   ` Johan Hovold
2018-07-16 13:29     ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2018-07-16 14:23       ` Johan Hovold
2018-07-16 11:35 ` [PATCH 2/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: Use correct regmap when checking for error Niklas Cassel
2018-07-20 16:45   ` Applied "regulator: qcom_spmi: Use correct regmap when checking for error" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2018-07-20 16:45     ` Mark Brown
2018-07-16 11:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: Do not initialise static to NULL Niklas Cassel
2018-07-20 16:45   ` Applied "regulator: qcom_spmi: Do not initialise static to NULL" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2018-07-20 16:45     ` Mark Brown
2018-07-16 11:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] regulator: qcom_spmi: Indent with tabs instead of spaces Niklas Cassel
2018-07-20 16:45   ` Applied "regulator: qcom_spmi: Indent with tabs instead of spaces" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2018-07-20 16:45     ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180716132931.GA866@centauri.lan \
    --to=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=johan@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.