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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 566CCC2D0E9 for ; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:35:51 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2396D20714 for ; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="BriQjJ7g"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="kJztcR/o" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2396D20714 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description :Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=XvA6CpLTL12C2X903fy3Ye/owlPDcUbudojyOvvw/3E=; b=BriQjJ7gH/RJLJ tJvXZYjWFlMJWtitnbO+2rfHRCv7W5KTGMBD09QKfIPl69snOK3lfBmL5ETxT816yZCpNjirmatOm bUIHKOt6w1WuvtXBZvG9yHZz16gDzZFyu4ugUM2Hn92aFD0SPgdjB5ZGc5fs9SaZnsNlfm9JVMwJJ 3u7ROQ2G0ioniOb5EYDIBxJYk88/6bCTcO5F8nW1AkU8N5mQO7tVXdkbpfiQ5GGEI3RmJi8TlQIPy 9oKyX6DiZyOPElKH8wChqcOzjHarf4AxQZisJXyz4eizQGzheU5N53Yi2iqtqfSl+D8VOWi4E5vbC 73gMcjz/IW9xvkEQV+4A==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jHZED-0004qq-KX; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:35:49 +0000 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jHZEA-0004qC-8S for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:35:47 +0000 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 02QKZdhx019913; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1585254939; bh=7oFxOrVn9kAxU5Nag+rYJqlAUCr7/ru9mGgP0JQb4HQ=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=kJztcR/o4CVsqS6x4WZ9NlGs+bgrwSaib49+8okz9XJQRXtS62aEoVnugub56k2Sc WuLMDvLnv65nGcdbIPLUCkvF4v5jrFVpBnF4nw4DXbZFwJj/YNInbBvJhLdBhgqFJO P1mSzrTDbPsbvBeMl5R+UkY3WPTNWowBN0WI9rQY= Received: from DLEE103.ent.ti.com (dlee103.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.33]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 02QKZdnb079059; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:39 -0500 Received: from DLEE101.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.31) by DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:38 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DLEE101.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:38 -0500 Received: from [10.250.86.212] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 02QKZcFK118216; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:38 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] remoteproc: use a local copy for the name field To: Bjorn Andersson References: <20200324201819.23095-1-s-anna@ti.com> <20200324201819.23095-3-s-anna@ti.com> <20200326054234.GA59436@builder> <2089a4a8-d5e4-e4f5-e7bc-7d053f654204@ti.com> <20200326194304.GB59436@builder> From: Suman Anna Message-ID: <3c38485d-5bae-a759-833c-45ddb0e6cfcd@ti.com> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:35:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200326194304.GB59436@builder> Content-Language: en-US X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200326_133546_385816_683ECF84 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.10 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Poirier , Lokesh Vutla , linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 3/26/20 2:43 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu 26 Mar 07:01 PDT 2020, Suman Anna wrote: > >> Hi Bjorn, >> >> On 3/26/20 12:42 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>> On Tue 24 Mar 13:18 PDT 2020, Suman Anna wrote: >>> >>>> The current name field used in the remoteproc structure is simply >>>> a pointer to a name field supplied during the rproc_alloc() call. >>>> The pointer passed in by remoteproc drivers during registration is >>>> typically a dev_name pointer, but it is possible that the pointer >>>> will no longer remain valid if the devices themselves were created >>>> at runtime like in the case of of_platform_populate(), and were >>>> deleted upon any failures within the respective remoteproc driver >>>> probe function. >>>> >>>> So, allocate and maintain a local copy for this name field to >>>> keep it agnostic of the logic used in the remoteproc drivers. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna >>>> --- >>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 9 ++++++++- >>>> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 2 +- >>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> index aca6d022901a..6e0b91fa6f11 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> @@ -1989,6 +1989,7 @@ static void rproc_type_release(struct device *dev) >>>> >>>> kfree(rproc->firmware); >>>> kfree(rproc->ops); >>>> + kfree(rproc->name); >>>> kfree(rproc); >>>> } >>>> >>>> @@ -2061,7 +2062,13 @@ struct rproc *rproc_alloc(struct device *dev, const char *name, >>>> } >>>> >>>> rproc->firmware = p; >>>> - rproc->name = name; >>>> + rproc->name = kstrdup(name, GFP_KERNEL); >>> >>> Let's use kstrdup_const() instead here (and kfree_const() instead of >>> kfree()), so that the cases where we are passed a constant we won't >>> create a duplicate on the heap. >>> >>> And the "name" in struct rproc can remain const. >> >> Agreed, that's better functions to use for this. >> >>> >>>> + if (!rproc->name) { >>>> + kfree(p); >>>> + kfree(rproc->ops); >>>> + kfree(rproc); >>>> + return NULL; >>> >>> Perhaps we can rearrange the hunks here slightly and get to a point >>> where we can rely on the release function earlier? >> >> Not sure I understand. I don't see any release function, all failure >> paths in rproc_alloc() directly unwind the previous operations. You mean >> move this to before the alloc for rproc structure, something similar to >> what we are doing with firmware? >> > > Look at the failure for ida_simple_get(), there we're past the setup of > rproc->dev.type, so the rproc_type->release function will be invoked as > we call put_device(). > > So if you move the initialization of rproc->dev up right after the > allocation of rproc we should be able to rely on that to clean up all > these for us. Yeah ok. That's cleanup though, and probably a patch of its own, and not directly related to the subject of this patch. Yeah, I can rework this patch to sit on top of that cleanup patch. regards Suman > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> regards >> Suman >> >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Bjorn >>> >>>> + } >>>> rproc->priv = &rproc[1]; >>>> rproc->auto_boot = true; >>>> rproc->elf_class = ELFCLASS32; >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>>> index ddce7a7775d1..77788a4bb94e 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >>>> @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ struct rproc_dump_segment { >>>> struct rproc { >>>> struct list_head node; >>>> struct iommu_domain *domain; >>>> - const char *name; >>>> + char *name; >>>> char *firmware; >>>> void *priv; >>>> struct rproc_ops *ops; >>>> -- >>>> 2.23.0 >>>> >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel