* [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() @ 2015-01-14 15:45 Geert Uytterhoeven [not found] ` <1421250356-16690-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2015-01-14 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Likely, Rob Herring Cc: Gaurav Minocha, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Geert Uytterhoeven When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the parent node(s) will not be decremented. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> --- Background. While investigating a reference count imbalance issue with CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC=y, I wrote the debug code below to validate the reference counts of the nodes I was interested in. During the first call of check_refcnts(), it gathers all reference counts. During a subsequent call, it verifies that they are still the same. Surprisingly, lots of reference counts were wrong, and kept incrementing every time check_refcnts() was called. I was just wondering whether it would be useful to have a reference count test in OF_UNITTEST, but now I see the "select OF_DYNAMIC" will go away? Feel free to (ab)use the code below and derive a unittest from it... static struct to_check { const char *path; int refcnt; } to_check[] = { { "/" }, { "/cpus/cpu@0" }, { "/cpus/cpu@1" }, /* ... other paths I was interested in ... */ }; static void check_refcnts(void) { static bool called; unsigned int i; const char *path; struct device_node *np; int refcnt; unsigned int errors = 0; pr_info("----- %s reference counts -----\n", called ? "Checking" : "Saving"); for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(to_check); i++) { path = to_check[i].path; np = of_find_node_by_path(path); if (!np) continue; refcnt = atomic_read(&np->kobj.kref.refcount); if (!called) { pr_info("%s %d\n", path, refcnt); to_check[i].refcnt = refcnt; } else if (refcnt == to_check[i].refcnt) { pr_info("%s %d (OK)\n", path, refcnt); } else { pr_info("%s %d (should be %d)\n", path, refcnt, to_check[i].refcnt); errors++; } of_node_put(np); } if (called) pr_info("----- Checking done (%u errors) -----\n", errors); else pr_info("----- Saving done -----\n"); called = true; } --- drivers/of/base.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index 36536b6a8834acd2..f3e346e19c69d1f2 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++ b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -791,8 +791,10 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_opts_by_path(const char *path, const char **opt if (!np) np = of_node_get(of_root); while (np && *path == '/') { + struct device_node *parent = np; path++; /* Increment past '/' delimiter */ - np = __of_find_node_by_path(np, path); + np = __of_find_node_by_path(parent, path); + of_node_put(parent); path = strchrnul(path, '/'); } raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); -- 1.9.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1421250356-16690-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() [not found] ` <1421250356-16690-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> @ 2015-01-22 16:14 ` Grant Likely 2015-01-22 16:18 ` Grant Likely [not found] ` <20150122161446.101EBC40A80-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Grant Likely @ 2015-01-22 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Gaurav Minocha, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Geert Uytterhoeven On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:45:56 +0100 , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> wrote: > When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old > one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the > parent node(s) will not be decremented. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> > --- > Background. > > While investigating a reference count imbalance issue with > CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC=y, I wrote the debug code below to validate the > reference counts of the nodes I was interested in. > During the first call of check_refcnts(), it gathers all reference > counts. During a subsequent call, it verifies that they are still the > same. > > Surprisingly, lots of reference counts were wrong, and kept incrementing > every time check_refcnts() was called. Yup, reference counting is a mess. We definitely need tests to make sure the core code does the right things with them. > I was just wondering whether it would be useful to have a reference > count test in OF_UNITTEST, but now I see the "select OF_DYNAMIC" will go > away? select OF_DYNAMIC is going away, but that only so that unittests work with both OF_DYNAMIC and !OF_DYANMIC. Instead there will be some unittests that are only run when OF_DYNAMIC is selected. > > Feel free to (ab)use the code below and derive a unittest from it... > > static struct to_check { > const char *path; > int refcnt; > } to_check[] = { > { "/" }, > { "/cpus/cpu@0" }, > { "/cpus/cpu@1" }, > /* ... other paths I was interested in ... */ > }; > > static void check_refcnts(void) > { > static bool called; > unsigned int i; > const char *path; > struct device_node *np; > int refcnt; > unsigned int errors = 0; > > pr_info("----- %s reference counts -----\n", > called ? "Checking" : "Saving"); > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(to_check); i++) { > path = to_check[i].path; > np = of_find_node_by_path(path); > if (!np) > continue; > > refcnt = atomic_read(&np->kobj.kref.refcount); > if (!called) { > pr_info("%s %d\n", path, refcnt); > to_check[i].refcnt = refcnt; > } else if (refcnt == to_check[i].refcnt) { > pr_info("%s %d (OK)\n", path, refcnt); > } else { > pr_info("%s %d (should be %d)\n", path, refcnt, > to_check[i].refcnt); > errors++; > } > > of_node_put(np); > } > > if (called) > pr_info("----- Checking done (%u errors) -----\n", errors); > else > pr_info("----- Saving done -----\n"); > > called = true; > } > --- > drivers/of/base.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c > index 36536b6a8834acd2..f3e346e19c69d1f2 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/base.c > +++ b/drivers/of/base.c > @@ -791,8 +791,10 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_opts_by_path(const char *path, const char **opt > if (!np) > np = of_node_get(of_root); > while (np && *path == '/') { > + struct device_node *parent = np; > path++; /* Increment past '/' delimiter */ > - np = __of_find_node_by_path(np, path); > + np = __of_find_node_by_path(parent, path); > + of_node_put(parent); > path = strchrnul(path, '/'); > } > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); This doesn't look /quite/ the best. __for_each_child_of_node() is fiddling with refcounts, but the '__' of functions shouldn't need to do that since they are called under the spinlock (nothing is going to change while they are called). __of_find_all_nodes() for instance doesn't do refcounting, but of_find_all_nodes() does. Does the following also solve the problem? g. --- diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index 36536b6a8834..0357b51a7440 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++ b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -626,9 +626,8 @@ static struct device_node *__of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node, next = prev ? prev->sibling : node->child; for (; next; next = next->sibling) - if (of_node_get(next)) + if (next) break; - of_node_put(prev); return next; } #define __for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \ @@ -650,7 +649,8 @@ struct device_node *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node, unsigned long flags; raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags); - next = __of_get_next_child(node, prev); + next = of_node_get(__of_get_next_child(node, prev)); + of_node_put(prev); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); return next; } @@ -789,12 +789,13 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_opts_by_path(const char *path, const char **opt /* Step down the tree matching path components */ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags); if (!np) - np = of_node_get(of_root); + np = of_root; while (np && *path == '/') { path++; /* Increment past '/' delimiter */ np = __of_find_node_by_path(np, path); path = strchrnul(path, '/'); } + of_node_get(np); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); return np; } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() 2015-01-22 16:14 ` Grant Likely @ 2015-01-22 16:18 ` Grant Likely [not found] ` <CACxGe6sDFQQfiN0+d5HV7JPE-0bosqdaKqrS-7o-obCy1NP_qg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> [not found] ` <20150122161446.101EBC40A80-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Grant Likely @ 2015-01-22 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring Cc: Gaurav Minocha, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:45:56 +0100 > , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> > wrote: >> When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old >> one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the >> parent node(s) will not be decremented. >> >> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> >> --- [...] >> Feel free to (ab)use the code below and derive a unittest from it... BTW, can you do this please? They are pretty important for core changes now, and I'm stuck with doing them if the person supplying a patch does not (and I'm already too much of a bottleneck on the DT code). g. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CACxGe6sDFQQfiN0+d5HV7JPE-0bosqdaKqrS-7o-obCy1NP_qg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() [not found] ` <CACxGe6sDFQQfiN0+d5HV7JPE-0bosqdaKqrS-7o-obCy1NP_qg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> @ 2015-01-22 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2015-01-22 20:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Likely Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Gaurav Minocha, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Hi Grant, On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:45:56 +0100 >> , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >>> When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old >>> one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the >>> parent node(s) will not be decremented. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> >>> --- > [...] >>> Feel free to (ab)use the code below and derive a unittest from it... > > BTW, can you do this please? They are pretty important for core > changes now, and I'm stuck with doing them if the person supplying a > patch does not (and I'm already too much of a bottleneck on the DT > code). I'll see whether I can get to it... Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20150122161446.101EBC40A80-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() [not found] ` <20150122161446.101EBC40A80-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> @ 2015-01-22 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2015-01-22 20:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Likely Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Gaurav Minocha, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Hi Grant, On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:45:56 +0100 > , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> > wrote: >> When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old >> one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the >> parent node(s) will not be decremented. >> >> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> >> --- >> Background. >> >> While investigating a reference count imbalance issue with >> CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC=y, I wrote the debug code below to validate the >> reference counts of the nodes I was interested in. >> During the first call of check_refcnts(), it gathers all reference >> counts. During a subsequent call, it verifies that they are still the >> same. >> >> Surprisingly, lots of reference counts were wrong, and kept incrementing >> every time check_refcnts() was called. >> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c >> index 36536b6a8834acd2..f3e346e19c69d1f2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/base.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c >> @@ -791,8 +791,10 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_opts_by_path(const char *path, const char **opt >> if (!np) >> np = of_node_get(of_root); >> while (np && *path == '/') { >> + struct device_node *parent = np; >> path++; /* Increment past '/' delimiter */ >> - np = __of_find_node_by_path(np, path); >> + np = __of_find_node_by_path(parent, path); >> + of_node_put(parent); >> path = strchrnul(path, '/'); >> } >> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); > > This doesn't look /quite/ the best. __for_each_child_of_node() is > fiddling with refcounts, but the '__' of functions shouldn't need to do > that since they are called under the spinlock (nothing is going to > change while they are called). __of_find_all_nodes() for instance > doesn't do refcounting, but of_find_all_nodes() does. > > Does the following also solve the problem? Yes, it does. Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> > diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c > index 36536b6a8834..0357b51a7440 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/base.c > +++ b/drivers/of/base.c > @@ -626,9 +626,8 @@ static struct device_node *__of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node, > > next = prev ? prev->sibling : node->child; > for (; next; next = next->sibling) > - if (of_node_get(next)) > + if (next) > break; > - of_node_put(prev); > return next; > } > #define __for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \ > @@ -650,7 +649,8 @@ struct device_node *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node, > unsigned long flags; > > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags); > - next = __of_get_next_child(node, prev); > + next = of_node_get(__of_get_next_child(node, prev)); > + of_node_put(prev); > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); > return next; > } > @@ -789,12 +789,13 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_opts_by_path(const char *path, const char **opt > /* Step down the tree matching path components */ > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags); > if (!np) > - np = of_node_get(of_root); > + np = of_root; > while (np && *path == '/') { > path++; /* Increment past '/' delimiter */ > np = __of_find_node_by_path(np, path); > path = strchrnul(path, '/'); > } > + of_node_get(np); > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags); > return np; > } Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-22 20:35 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-01-14 15:45 [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path() Geert Uytterhoeven [not found] ` <1421250356-16690-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas-gXvu3+zWzMSzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> 2015-01-22 16:14 ` Grant Likely 2015-01-22 16:18 ` Grant Likely [not found] ` <CACxGe6sDFQQfiN0+d5HV7JPE-0bosqdaKqrS-7o-obCy1NP_qg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> 2015-01-22 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven [not found] ` <20150122161446.101EBC40A80-WNowdnHR2B42iJbIjFUEsiwD8/FfD2ys@public.gmane.org> 2015-01-22 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).