mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Ambrozewicz <aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>, Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>,
	Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
	Jia Jia <physicalmtea@gmail.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/7] gpiolib: free the label of lines released after their chip was removed
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 13:29:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261029-gpiolib-chip-removal-v4-2-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029-gpiolib-chip-removal-v4-0-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>

gpiod_free_commit() drops the consumer label only while the chip is
still there. A line that user space keeps requested across
gpiochip_remove() is released when gdev->chip is already NULL, and its
label leaks:

  unreferenced object (size 32):
    comm "gpio-hold"
    backtrace (crc 7ff222d9):
      desc_set_label
      gpiod_request_commit
      gpiod_request
      linereq_create
      gpio_ioctl

Clear the label before the chip check. The ->free() callback, the flags
update and the line state notification need the chip and stay under it.

Reproduced with gpio-sim: request a line, set the chip's "live"
attribute to 0, then close the request. kmemleak reports up to 30 such
objects after 30 cycles; with this change, none after 100.

Fixes: 35b545332b80 ("gpio: remove gpio_lock")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Adrian Ambrozewicz <aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index faf4a8507dd6..49b2823dab0c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -2669,7 +2669,12 @@ void gpiod_free_commit(struct gpio_desc *desc)
 
 	flags = READ_ONCE(desc->flags);
 
-	if (guard.gc && test_bit(GPIOD_FLAG_REQUESTED, &flags)) {
+	if (guard.gc && !test_bit(GPIOD_FLAG_REQUESTED, &flags))
+		return;
+
+	desc_set_label(desc, NULL);
+
+	if (guard.gc) {
 		if (guard.gc->free)
 			guard.gc->free(guard.gc, gpiod_hwgpio(desc));
 
@@ -2688,7 +2693,6 @@ void gpiod_free_commit(struct gpio_desc *desc)
 #ifdef CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC
 		WRITE_ONCE(desc->hog, NULL);
 #endif
-		desc_set_label(desc, NULL);
 		WRITE_ONCE(desc->flags, flags);
 #ifdef CONFIG_GPIO_CDEV
 		WRITE_ONCE(desc->debounce_period_us, 0);
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-10-29 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-29 11:29 [PATCH v4 0/7] gpiolib: fix chip removal with lines still requested from user space Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] gpiolib: wait for pending label frees before cleaning up desc_srcu Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-29 11:29 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz [this message]
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] gpiolib: cdev: do not free line IRQs again after the chip is removed Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] gpiolib: cdev: don't sleep in the SRCU read section in read() Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] gpiolib: cdev: don't leak the IRQ name when the chip is removed Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] gpiolib: cdev: don't report a failed line read as an edge Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-30 11:14   ` Kent Gibson
2026-10-30 12:31     ` Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-30 13:46       ` Kent Gibson
2026-10-29 11:29 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] gpiolib: let the character device free its IRQs first on chip removal Adrian Ambrozewicz

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=20261029-gpiolib-chip-removal-v4-2-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com \
    --to=aambrozewicz@nvidia.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=brgl@kernel.org \
    --cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
    --cc=linusw@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=physicalmtea@gmail.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=warthog618@gmail.com \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®