From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>
To: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>
Cc: kael_w@yeah.net, Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>,
ajd@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/hotplug: Remove unneeded of_node_put() in pnv_php
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 06:39:41 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tuhcx6v6.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211020094604.2106-1-wanjiabing@vivo.com>
Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com> writes:
> Fix following coccicheck warning:
> ./drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c:161:2-13: ERROR: probable double put.
>
> Device node iterators put the previous value of the index variable, so
> an explicit put causes a double put.
I suppose Coccinelle doesn't take into account that this code is
detaching and freeing the nodes.
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> index f4c2e6e01be0..f3da4f95d73f 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> @@ -158,7 +158,6 @@ static void pnv_php_detach_device_nodes(struct device_node *parent)
> for_each_child_of_node(parent, dn) {
> pnv_php_detach_device_nodes(dn);
>
> - of_node_put(dn);
> of_detach_node(dn);
> }
The code might be improved by comments explaining how the bare
of_node_put() corresponds to a "get" somewhere else in the driver, and
how it doesn't render the ongoing traversal unsafe. It looks suspicious
on first review, but I believe it's intentional and probably correct as
written.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>
To: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>
Cc: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>,
Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>,
ajd@linux.ibm.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
kael_w@yeah.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/hotplug: Remove unneeded of_node_put() in pnv_php
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 06:39:41 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tuhcx6v6.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211020094604.2106-1-wanjiabing@vivo.com>
Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com> writes:
> Fix following coccicheck warning:
> ./drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c:161:2-13: ERROR: probable double put.
>
> Device node iterators put the previous value of the index variable, so
> an explicit put causes a double put.
I suppose Coccinelle doesn't take into account that this code is
detaching and freeing the nodes.
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> index f4c2e6e01be0..f3da4f95d73f 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pnv_php.c
> @@ -158,7 +158,6 @@ static void pnv_php_detach_device_nodes(struct device_node *parent)
> for_each_child_of_node(parent, dn) {
> pnv_php_detach_device_nodes(dn);
>
> - of_node_put(dn);
> of_detach_node(dn);
> }
The code might be improved by comments explaining how the bare
of_node_put() corresponds to a "get" somewhere else in the driver, and
how it doesn't render the ongoing traversal unsafe. It looks suspicious
on first review, but I believe it's intentional and probably correct as
written.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-20 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-20 9:46 [PATCH] PCI/hotplug: Remove unneeded of_node_put() in pnv_php Wan Jiabing
2021-10-20 11:39 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2021-10-20 11:39 ` Nathan Lynch
2021-10-20 16:57 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2021-10-20 16:57 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2021-10-20 16:53 ` Tyrel Datwyler
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=87tuhcx6v6.fsf@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nathanl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kael_w@yeah.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tyreld@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=wanjiabing@vivo.com \
/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.