[PATCH next] arch: powerpc: platforms: Remove unnecessary call to of_node_get

[PATCH next] arch: powerpc: platforms: Remove unnecessary call to of_node_get

[Prabhav Kumar Vaish]

`dev->of_node` has a pointer to device node, of_node_get call seems
unnecessary.
It will automate the cleanup process allowing to remove the of_node_put
call.

Signed-off-by: Prabhav Kumar Vaish <pvkumar5749404@gmail.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c | 9 +++------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
index 4cd9c0de22c2..5b794ce08689 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
@@ -780,14 +780,13 @@ static int __init cell_iommu_init_disabled(void)
 static u64 cell_iommu_get_fixed_address(struct device *dev)
 {
 	u64 cpu_addr, size, best_size, dev_addr = OF_BAD_ADDR;
-	struct device_node *np;
+	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
 	const u32 *ranges = NULL;
 	int i, len, best, naddr, nsize, pna, range_size;
 
 	/* We can be called for platform devices that have no of_node */
-	np = of_node_get(dev->of_node);
 	if (!np)
-		goto out;
+		return dev_addr;
 
 	while (1) {
 		naddr = of_n_addr_cells(np);
@@ -805,7 +804,7 @@ static u64 cell_iommu_get_fixed_address(struct device *dev)
 
 	if (!ranges) {
 		dev_dbg(dev, "iommu: no dma-ranges found\n");
-		goto out;
+		return dev_addr;
 	}
 
 	len /= sizeof(u32);
@@ -833,8 +832,6 @@ static u64 cell_iommu_get_fixed_address(struct device *dev)
 	} else
 		dev_dbg(dev, "iommu: no suitable range found!\n");
 
-out:
-	of_node_put(np);
 
 	return dev_addr;
 }
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH next] arch: powerpc: platforms: Remove unnecessary call to of_node_get

[Michael Ellerman]

Prabhav Kumar Vaish <pvkumar5749404@gmail.com> writes:
> `dev->of_node` has a pointer to device node, of_node_get call seems
> unnecessary.

Sorry but it is necessary.

> Signed-off-by: Prabhav Kumar Vaish <pvkumar5749404@gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c | 9 +++------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> index 4cd9c0de22c2..5b794ce08689 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> @@ -780,14 +780,13 @@ static int __init cell_iommu_init_disabled(void)
>  static u64 cell_iommu_get_fixed_address(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	u64 cpu_addr, size, best_size, dev_addr = OF_BAD_ADDR;
> -	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
>  	const u32 *ranges = NULL;
>  	int i, len, best, naddr, nsize, pna, range_size;
>  
>  	/* We can be called for platform devices that have no of_node */
> -	np = of_node_get(dev->of_node);
>  	if (!np)
> -		goto out;
> +		return dev_addr;
>  
>  	while (1) {
>  		naddr = of_n_addr_cells(np);

		nsize = of_n_size_cells(np);
		np = of_get_next_parent(np);
		if (!np)
			break;

of_get_next_parent() drops the reference of the node passed to it (np).

So if you actually tested your patch you should see a recount underflow.

cheers

Re: [PATCH next] arch: powerpc: platforms: Remove unnecessary call to of_node_get

[prabhav kumar]

On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 4:55 PM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>
> Prabhav Kumar Vaish <pvkumar5749404@gmail.com> writes:
> > `dev->of_node` has a pointer to device node, of_node_get call seems
> > unnecessary.
>
> Sorry but it is necessary.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Prabhav Kumar Vaish <pvkumar5749404@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c | 9 +++------
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> > index 4cd9c0de22c2..5b794ce08689 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c
> > @@ -780,14 +780,13 @@ static int __init cell_iommu_init_disabled(void)
> >  static u64 cell_iommu_get_fixed_address(struct device *dev)
> >  {
> >       u64 cpu_addr, size, best_size, dev_addr = OF_BAD_ADDR;
> > -     struct device_node *np;
> > +     struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> >       const u32 *ranges = NULL;
> >       int i, len, best, naddr, nsize, pna, range_size;
> >
> >       /* We can be called for platform devices that have no of_node */
> > -     np = of_node_get(dev->of_node);
> >       if (!np)
> > -             goto out;
> > +             return dev_addr;
> >
> >       while (1) {
> >               naddr = of_n_addr_cells(np);
>
>                 nsize = of_n_size_cells(np);
>                 np = of_get_next_parent(np);
>                 if (!np)
>                         break;
>
> of_get_next_parent() drops the reference of the node passed to it (np).
>
> So if you actually tested your patch you should see a recount underflow.
>
Thanks, I will check this out once again
Prabhav
> cheers