* [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
@ 2023-11-14 11:04 Herve Codina
2023-11-14 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-11-14 13:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Herve Codina @ 2023-11-14 11:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Andy Shevchenko,
Rasmus Villemoes, Sergey Senozhatsky, Sakari Ailus,
Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: linux-kernel, Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund,
Thomas Petazzoni, Herve Codina, stable
A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
pr_debug() call:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
Call Trace:
<TASK>
? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
? __warn+0x81/0x130
? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
? report_bug+0x191/0x1c0
? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
? prb_read_valid+0x1b/0x30
? handle_bug+0x3c/0x80
? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70
? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
kobject_get+0x68/0x70
of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
va_format.isra.0+0x71/0x130
vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
vprintk_store+0x162/0x4d0
? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
? try_to_wake_up+0x9c/0x620
? rwsem_mark_wake+0x1b2/0x310
vprintk_emit+0xe4/0x2b0
_printk+0x5c/0x80
__dynamic_pr_debug+0x131/0x160
? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
__fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
kobject_put+0x7b/0x190
...
Indeed, an fwnode (of_node) is being destroyed and so, of_node_release()
is called because the of_node refcount reached 0.
From of_node_release() several function calls are done and lead to
a pr_debug() calls with %pfwf to print the fwnode full name.
The issue is not present if we change %pfwf to %pfwP.
To print the full name, %pfwf iterates over the current node and its
parents and obtain/drop a reference to all nodes involved.
In order to allow to print the full name (%pfwf) of a node while it is
being destroyed, do not obtain/drop a reference to this current node.
Fixes: a92eb7621b9f ("lib/vsprintf: Make use of fwnode API to obtain node names and separators")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
---
lib/vsprintf.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
index afb88b24fa74..74ef229c2783 100644
--- a/lib/vsprintf.c
+++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
@@ -2108,8 +2108,8 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
{
int depth;
- /* Loop starting from the root node to the current node. */
- for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth >= 0; depth--) {
+ /* Loop starting from the root node to the parent of current node. */
+ for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth > 0; depth--) {
struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth);
@@ -2121,6 +2121,16 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
}
+ /* Handle current node without calling fwnode_handle_{get,put}().
+ * This allows to print the full node name while the current node is
+ * being destroyed (ie print from a function called because of
+ * refcount == 0) without any refcount issues.
+ */
+ buf = string(buf, end, fwnode_get_name_prefix(fwnode),
+ default_str_spec);
+ buf = string(buf, end, fwnode_get_name(fwnode),
+ default_str_spec);
+
return buf;
}
--
2.41.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 11:04 [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0 Herve Codina
@ 2023-11-14 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-11-14 11:48 ` Herve Codina
2023-11-14 13:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sakari Ailus @ 2023-11-14 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Herve Codina
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Andy Shevchenko,
Rasmus Villemoes, Sergey Senozhatsky, Rafael J. Wysocki,
linux-kernel, Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund,
Thomas Petazzoni, stable
Hi Herve,
Thanks for the patch.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:04:56PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
> pr_debug() call:
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> ? __warn+0x81/0x130
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> ? report_bug+0x191/0x1c0
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? prb_read_valid+0x1b/0x30
> ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x80
> ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70
> ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> kobject_get+0x68/0x70
> of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
> of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
> fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
> fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
> vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> va_format.isra.0+0x71/0x130
> vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> vprintk_store+0x162/0x4d0
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? try_to_wake_up+0x9c/0x620
> ? rwsem_mark_wake+0x1b2/0x310
> vprintk_emit+0xe4/0x2b0
> _printk+0x5c/0x80
> __dynamic_pr_debug+0x131/0x160
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> __fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
> fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
> of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
> kobject_put+0x7b/0x190
> ...
>
> Indeed, an fwnode (of_node) is being destroyed and so, of_node_release()
> is called because the of_node refcount reached 0.
> From of_node_release() several function calls are done and lead to
> a pr_debug() calls with %pfwf to print the fwnode full name.
> The issue is not present if we change %pfwf to %pfwP.
>
> To print the full name, %pfwf iterates over the current node and its
> parents and obtain/drop a reference to all nodes involved.
>
> In order to allow to print the full name (%pfwf) of a node while it is
> being destroyed, do not obtain/drop a reference to this current node.
>
> Fixes: a92eb7621b9f ("lib/vsprintf: Make use of fwnode API to obtain node names and separators")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
> ---
> lib/vsprintf.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> index afb88b24fa74..74ef229c2783 100644
> --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> @@ -2108,8 +2108,8 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> {
> int depth;
>
> - /* Loop starting from the root node to the current node. */
> - for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth >= 0; depth--) {
> + /* Loop starting from the root node to the parent of current node. */
> + for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth > 0; depth--) {
> struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
> fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth);
How about, without changing the loop:
/*
* Only get a reference for other nodes, fwnode refcount
* may be 0 here.
*/
struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
depth ? fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth) : fwnode;
>
> @@ -2121,6 +2121,16 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
And:
if (__fwnode != fwnode)
fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
> }
>
> + /* Handle current node without calling fwnode_handle_{get,put}().
> + * This allows to print the full node name while the current node is
> + * being destroyed (ie print from a function called because of
> + * refcount == 0) without any refcount issues.
> + */
> + buf = string(buf, end, fwnode_get_name_prefix(fwnode),
> + default_str_spec);
> + buf = string(buf, end, fwnode_get_name(fwnode),
> + default_str_spec);
It'd avoid duplicating this part, too, which I find worth the while.
> +
> return buf;
> }
>
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus
@ 2023-11-14 11:48 ` Herve Codina
2023-11-14 12:29 ` Sakari Ailus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Herve Codina @ 2023-11-14 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sakari Ailus
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Andy Shevchenko,
Rasmus Villemoes, Sergey Senozhatsky, Rafael J. Wysocki,
linux-kernel, Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund,
Thomas Petazzoni, stable
Hi Sakari,
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:28:43 +0000
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > @@ -2108,8 +2108,8 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> > {
> > int depth;
> >
> > - /* Loop starting from the root node to the current node. */
> > - for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth >= 0; depth--) {
> > + /* Loop starting from the root node to the parent of current node. */
> > + for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth > 0; depth--) {
> > struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
> > fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth);
>
> How about, without changing the loop:
>
> /*
> * Only get a reference for other nodes, fwnode refcount
> * may be 0 here.
> */
> struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
> depth ? fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth) : fwnode;
>
> >
> > @@ -2121,6 +2121,16 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> > fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
>
> And:
>
> if (__fwnode != fwnode)
> fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
>
Sure.
I will just change to keep the both tests consistent.
I mean test with depth or test with __fwnode != fwnode but avoid
mixing them.
What do you think about testing using depth in all cases and so:
if (depth)
fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
Best regards,
Hervé
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 11:48 ` Herve Codina
@ 2023-11-14 12:29 ` Sakari Ailus
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sakari Ailus @ 2023-11-14 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Herve Codina
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Andy Shevchenko,
Rasmus Villemoes, Sergey Senozhatsky, Rafael J. Wysocki,
linux-kernel, Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund,
Thomas Petazzoni, stable
Hi Herve,
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:48:32PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:28:43 +0000
> Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > > @@ -2108,8 +2108,8 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> > > {
> > > int depth;
> > >
> > > - /* Loop starting from the root node to the current node. */
> > > - for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth >= 0; depth--) {
> > > + /* Loop starting from the root node to the parent of current node. */
> > > + for (depth = fwnode_count_parents(fwnode); depth > 0; depth--) {
> > > struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
> > > fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth);
> >
> > How about, without changing the loop:
> >
> > /*
> > * Only get a reference for other nodes, fwnode refcount
> > * may be 0 here.
> > */
> > struct fwnode_handle *__fwnode =
> > depth ? fwnode_get_nth_parent(fwnode, depth) : fwnode;
> >
> > >
> > > @@ -2121,6 +2121,16 @@ char *fwnode_full_name_string(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, char *buf,
> > > fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
> >
> > And:
> >
> > if (__fwnode != fwnode)
> > fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
> >
>
> Sure.
> I will just change to keep the both tests consistent.
> I mean test with depth or test with __fwnode != fwnode but avoid
> mixing them.
>
> What do you think about testing using depth in all cases and so:
> if (depth)
> fwnode_handle_put(__fwnode);
I'd compare fwnodes as we're putting __fwnode since we've gotten a
reference to fwnodes different from fwnode. I don't have a strong opinion
on this though, up to you.
--
Regards,
Sakari Ailus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 11:04 [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0 Herve Codina
2023-11-14 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus
@ 2023-11-14 13:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-11-14 13:19 ` Herve Codina
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2023-11-14 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Herve Codina
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Rasmus Villemoes,
Sergey Senozhatsky, Sakari Ailus, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel,
Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund, Thomas Petazzoni,
stable
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:04:56PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
> pr_debug() call:
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> ? __warn+0x81/0x130
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> ? report_bug+0x191/0x1c0
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? prb_read_valid+0x1b/0x30
> ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x80
> ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70
> ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
> ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> kobject_get+0x68/0x70
> of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
> of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
> fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
> fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
> vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> va_format.isra.0+0x71/0x130
> vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> vprintk_store+0x162/0x4d0
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> ? try_to_wake_up+0x9c/0x620
> ? rwsem_mark_wake+0x1b2/0x310
> vprintk_emit+0xe4/0x2b0
> _printk+0x5c/0x80
> __dynamic_pr_debug+0x131/0x160
> ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> __fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
> fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
> of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
> kobject_put+0x7b/0x190
> ...
Please, do not put so many unrelated lines of backtrace in the commit message.
Leave only the important ones (the Submitting Patches document suggests some
like ~3-5 lines only).
> Indeed, an fwnode (of_node) is being destroyed and so, of_node_release()
> is called because the of_node refcount reached 0.
> From of_node_release() several function calls are done and lead to
> a pr_debug() calls with %pfwf to print the fwnode full name.
> The issue is not present if we change %pfwf to %pfwP.
>
> To print the full name, %pfwf iterates over the current node and its
> parents and obtain/drop a reference to all nodes involved.
>
> In order to allow to print the full name (%pfwf) of a node while it is
> being destroyed, do not obtain/drop a reference to this current node.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 13:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2023-11-14 13:19 ` Herve Codina
2023-11-14 13:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Herve Codina @ 2023-11-14 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Shevchenko
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Rasmus Villemoes,
Sergey Senozhatsky, Sakari Ailus, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel,
Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund, Thomas Petazzoni,
stable
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 15:12:47 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:04:56PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> > A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
> > pr_debug() call:
>
> > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > Call Trace:
> > <TASK>
> > ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > ? __warn+0x81/0x130
> > ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > ? report_bug+0x191/0x1c0
> > ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> > ? prb_read_valid+0x1b/0x30
> > ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x80
> > ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70
> > ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
> > ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > kobject_get+0x68/0x70
> > of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
> > of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
> > fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
> > fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
> > vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> > va_format.isra.0+0x71/0x130
> > vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> > vprintk_store+0x162/0x4d0
> > ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> > ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> > ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> > ? try_to_wake_up+0x9c/0x620
> > ? rwsem_mark_wake+0x1b2/0x310
> > vprintk_emit+0xe4/0x2b0
> > _printk+0x5c/0x80
> > __dynamic_pr_debug+0x131/0x160
> > ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0x7f
> > __fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
> > fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
> > of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
> > kobject_put+0x7b/0x190
> > ...
>
> Please, do not put so many unrelated lines of backtrace in the commit message.
> Leave only the important ones (the Submitting Patches document suggests some
> like ~3-5 lines only).
Ok, I will remove some of them.
Best regards,
Hervé
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 13:19 ` Herve Codina
@ 2023-11-14 13:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-11-14 13:28 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2023-11-14 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Herve Codina
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Rasmus Villemoes,
Sergey Senozhatsky, Sakari Ailus, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel,
Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund, Thomas Petazzoni,
stable
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 02:19:34PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 15:12:47 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:04:56PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> > > A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
> > > pr_debug() call:
---8<---
> > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > > Call Trace:
> > > ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
...
> > > of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
> > > of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
> > > fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
> > > fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
...
> > > vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
...
> > > __fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
> > > fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
> > > of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
...
---8<---
> > Please, do not put so many unrelated lines of backtrace in the commit message.
> > Leave only the important ones (the Submitting Patches document suggests some
> > like ~3-5 lines only).
>
> Ok, I will remove some of them.
Thanks (my suggestion is above).
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
2023-11-14 13:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2023-11-14 13:28 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2023-11-14 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Herve Codina
Cc: Saravana Kannan, Petr Mladek, Steven Rostedt, Rasmus Villemoes,
Sergey Senozhatsky, Sakari Ailus, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel,
Allan Nielsen, Horatiu Vultur, Steen Hegelund, Thomas Petazzoni,
stable
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 03:27:43PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 02:19:34PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 15:12:47 +0200
> > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 12:04:56PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> > > > A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
> > > > pr_debug() call:
---8<---
> > > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
> > > > Call Trace:
> > > > ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
>
> ...
These are actually not needed as duplicating WARNING above.
> > > > of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
> > > > of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
> > > > fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
> > > > fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
> ...
>
> > > > vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
> ...
> > > > __fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
> > > > fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
> > > > of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
> ...
---8<---
> > > Please, do not put so many unrelated lines of backtrace in the commit message.
> > > Leave only the important ones (the Submitting Patches document suggests some
> > > like ~3-5 lines only).
> >
> > Ok, I will remove some of them.
>
> Thanks (my suggestion is above).
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-14 13:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-11-14 11:04 [PATCH 1/1] lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0 Herve Codina
2023-11-14 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-11-14 11:48 ` Herve Codina
2023-11-14 12:29 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-11-14 13:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-11-14 13:19 ` Herve Codina
2023-11-14 13:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-11-14 13:28 ` Andy Shevchenko
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox