From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A006BC43217 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 13:32:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=tZtiOK6W7MTpg1MHpvLW0VE1LJ+GlMUK7XO4LF6OQR4=; b=AD17RRU49my0+M K9l7UlBBJyY7rO/cZswXR32w4B6huYuhGz1DBwBx+7NCefUyUhuwXcmGrO5nCO0vyqHbXSAG1PZKn e3Ww7cvu28VH36/RV3w/03dlwqL78TIX0Ah3N1c97rf6v3RzN+YJE/oSCp7J60s7yIr8nx7aHRe0V cINGOlOjLZYyvwKdROl0bdaFSMf+GXy49uawagJDp29gMdYyYdDq+ZmL5h+lnoZV0pkVLeChB4UST /+pRD+yGF0B1rmMzw1VFhuTnHLqhr+I58gQ74ev+9OjxAv8b1MbR27Y6ohNsRhJfuobENTkTV87iV lY1O6s+2xpc6QA9qYU3g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1p0jez-007hvJ-4u; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 13:31:29 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1p0jev-007hu8-MI for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 13:31:27 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43D5862002; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 13:31:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2E61C433C1; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 13:31:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1669901483; bh=kLtneGY9D+ZSAz7b/D3t9fHi1UjdNmz2jAAh4dXlsIk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pa6SiLdu66W91X5943Xdy7wmKkln33KXgdSx7ymB5q+unBRuCJv8T1lGrhJlgIcUM drGqJLV1NqtPzd++5Wwh72mQCNi2I0TNLQtIKsfm8xIzeplSgTCW4VubEqHL3yhv/P lfeNSW/LCFPWEesGD2LXQvKU46R/LFNU3UteQIaKDaKyWxIoo5qm+jO9oKJ7wgJR9g eKx3P0SqfcG+5ft5UNg7zNelj99T8vmUdLmTHyNsYQYWAVHshmWJ1/TUF+k0qB1HJF kCDuhCUsm2IUlsCysMC2tnG4/z5gs983od1JDaRVJ+BDKWk8sItPrrI0/OXT9muoLH SaoFFwr/7IZBw== Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 13:31:18 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: liulongfang Cc: robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu: fix smmu initialization memory leak problem Message-ID: <20221201133118.GA28489@willie-the-truck> References: <20221121030421.19295-1-liulongfang@huawei.com> <20221121180552.GB7645@willie-the-truck> <20221129152452.GB26561@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20221201_053125_844701_43D9C358 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 27.34 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 08:42:02PM +0800, liulongfang wrote: > On 2022/11/29 23:24, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 08:00:39PM +0800, liulongfang wrote: > >> On 2022/11/22 2:05, Will Deacon wrote: > >>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:04:21AM +0800, Longfang Liu wrote: > >>>> When iommu_device_register() in arm_smmu_device_probe() fails, > >>>> in addition to sysfs needs to be deleted, device should also > >>>> be disabled, and the memory of iopf needs to be released to > >>>> prevent memory leak of iopf. > >>>> > >>>> Changes v1 -> v2: > >>>> -Improve arm_smmu_device_probe() abnormal exit function. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Longfang Liu > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 16 +++++++++++----- > >>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c > >>>> index ab160198edd6..b892f5233f88 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c > >>>> @@ -3815,7 +3815,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> /* Initialise in-memory data structures */ > >>>> ret = arm_smmu_init_structures(smmu); > >>>> if (ret) > >>>> - return ret; > >>>> + goto err_iopf; > >>>> > >>>> /* Record our private device structure */ > >>>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, smmu); > >>>> @@ -3826,22 +3826,28 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> /* Reset the device */ > >>>> ret = arm_smmu_device_reset(smmu, bypass); > >>>> if (ret) > >>>> - return ret; > >>>> + goto err_iopf; > >>>> > >>>> /* And we're up. Go go go! */ > >>>> ret = iommu_device_sysfs_add(&smmu->iommu, dev, NULL, > >>>> "smmu3.%pa", &ioaddr); > >>>> if (ret) > >>>> - return ret; > >>>> + goto err_reset; > >>>> > >>>> ret = iommu_device_register(&smmu->iommu, &arm_smmu_ops, dev); > >>>> if (ret) { > >>>> dev_err(dev, "Failed to register iommu\n"); > >>>> - iommu_device_sysfs_remove(&smmu->iommu); > >>>> - return ret; > >>>> + goto err_sysfs_add; > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> return 0; > >>>> +err_sysfs_add: > >>>> + iommu_device_sysfs_remove(&smmu->iommu); > >>>> +err_reset: > >>>> + arm_smmu_device_disable(smmu); > >>>> +err_iopf: > >>>> + iopf_queue_free(smmu->evtq.iopf); > >>>> + return ret; > >>> > >>> I previously suggested using devres_alloc() for this instead. Did that > >>> not work? > >>> > >> > >> This patch is only for fixing iopf's memory leak. > >> The use of devres_alloc() is an optimization solution for iopf queue management, > >> which is another set of patch matters. > > > > Great, I look forward to that set of patches! > > > > Will this patch be merged into the next branch? I don't plan to merge this one, no. I'll wait for the other patches which do this using devres_alloc() instead. Thanks, Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel