mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Cc: wang.yi59@zte.com.cn, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"Wen Yang" <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>,
	"Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/15] ARM: actions: fix a leaked reference by adding missing of_node_put
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 08:14:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190309081410.yqc4e45zk7grolja@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190309021742.GA5664@Mani-XPS-13-9360>

On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 07:47:42AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> Hi Russel,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 11:40:48AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 07:33:52PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> > > The call to of_get_next_child returns a node pointer with refcount
> > > incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented after the last
> > > usage.
> > > 
> > > Detected by coccinelle with the following warnings:
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:112:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 103, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:124:2-8: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 115, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > > ./arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:137:3-9: ERROR: missing of_node_put; acquired a node pointer with refcount incremented on line 128, but without a corresponding object release within this function.
> > 
> > I question this.  Your reasoning is that the node is no longer used
> > so the reference count needs to be put.
> > 
> > However, in all these cases, data is read from the nodes properties
> > and the device remains in-use for the life of the kernel.  There is
> > a big difference here.
> > 
> > With normal drivers, each device is bound to their associated device
> > node associated with the device.  When the device node goes away, then
> > the corresponding device goes away too, which causes the driver to be
> > unbound from the device.
> > 
> > However, there is another class of "driver" which are the ones below,
> > where they are "permanent" devices.  These can never go away, even if
> > the device node refcount hits zero and the device node is freed - the
> > device is still present and in-use in the system.  So, having the
> > device node refcount hit zero is actually a bug: what that's saying
> > is the system device (eg, SCU) has gone away.  If you somehow were to
> > remove the SCU from the system, you'd end up severing the connection
> > between the CPU cores and the rest of the system - obviously resulting
> > in a dead system!
> > 
> > So, what is the point of dropping these refcounts for devices that can
> > never go away - and thus their associated device_node should also never
> > go away?
> > 
> 
> Yes, practically we would never hit this case but theoretically we should
> decrement the refcount for nodes/properties whenever we are done with it.
> As you know, there are 'n' number of places in kernel where we can see the
> refcount not being put after use. So I would welcome these kind of patches
> to set an example for someone who tries to use the of_* calls in future.
> 
> IMO, DT should've handled the refcount internally without exposing the
> pointers to external world.

It doesn't, that's my point.

In the case of normal drivers, there's an _extra_ refcount held by the
device that is created - see the of_node_get() in of_device_alloc().
This refcount exists for the lifetime of the device structure.  That
refcount exists for the duration that the device exists, which bounds
the lifetime of the availability of the device to the driver.

In effect, while the device driver is bound, there is a refcount on
the device node.  So, the device node is guaranteed to be around for
as long as the device driver is bound to the device.

For the cases being addressed in these patches, there is no driver, so
there is no bounding of the lifetime: the expectation is that the
lifetime is the duration of the kernel.  If such a device node were to
be deleted, then there is no way to unbind the driver, and if we have
dropped the refcount, the device node will be immediately freed.
However, the device is still in use.

These are a different "class" of driver.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up

      reply	other threads:[~2019-03-09  8:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-05 11:33 Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 02/15] ARM: bcm: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 17:24   ` Ray Jui
2019-03-08 18:50     ` Florian Fainelli
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 03/15] ARM: exynos: " Wen Yang
2019-03-19 20:39   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 04/15] ARM: hisi: " Wen Yang
2019-04-05 11:26   ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 05/15] ARM: imx51: " Wen Yang
2019-03-06  2:58   ` Shawn Guo
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 06/15] arm: npcm: " Wen Yang
2019-03-06 12:02   ` Avi Fishman
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 07/15] ARM: rockchip: " Wen Yang
2019-04-23 17:48   ` Heiko Stuebner
2019-03-05 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 08/15] ARM: shmobile: " Wen Yang
2019-03-08 12:07   ` Simon Horman
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 09/15] ARM: socfpga: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 10/15] ARM: sunxi: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:59   ` maxime.ripard
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 11/15] ARM: versatile: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 12/15] ARM: vexpress: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:39   ` Sudeep Holla
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 13/15] ARM: zynq: " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 14/15] arm64: cpu_ops: " Wen Yang
2019-04-01 15:37   ` Will Deacon
     [not found]     ` <201904031356099956278@zte.com.cn>
2019-04-03 12:44       ` 答复: Re: [PATCH v2 14/15] arm64: cpu_ops: fix a leaked reference byadding " Will Deacon
2019-03-05 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 15/15] ARM: axxia: fix a leaked reference by adding " Wen Yang
2019-03-05 11:40 ` [PATCH v2 01/15] ARM: actions: " Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-03-09  2:17   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2019-03-09  8:14     ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190309081410.yqc4e45zk7grolja@shell.armlinux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=afaerber@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=wang.yi59@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=wen.yang99@zte.com.cn \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome