From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>
To: "Johan Hovold" <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: "Bartosz Golaszewski" <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
"Daniel Scally" <djrscally@gmail.com>,
"Heikki Krogerus" <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
"Sakari Ailus" <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
"Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@kernel.org>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
<linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, <driver-core@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Balasubramani Vivekanandan"
<balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] software node: only let the owner release a managed node
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2026 15:10:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DMQQO3DTZE66.1Q2XGGDGN3WUP@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <avHMhh8ChrFE_b_e@hovoldconsulting.com>
On Mon Nov 9, 2026 at 2:37 PM CET, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 04:25:16PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> device_create_managed_software_node() creates a node whose lifetime is
>> tied to the device it was created for. software_node_notify_remove() is
>> called for every device that has the node as its fwnode (primary OR
>> secondary) and, if the node is managed, unconditionally detaches it from
>> that device and drops the creation reference.
>>
>> This breaks when the node is shared with another device. Example: the
>> i2c-designware copies the parent's fwnode to the adapter's struct device.
>> When the adapter is deleted, it releases the reference that belongs to
>> the owner and the latter ends up with a dangling pointer.
>>
>> Record the device's "manager" and only perform the actual release when
>> notify is called for that "owner" device.
>>
>> Reported-by: Balasubramani Vivekanandan <balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20261009164241.923756-2-balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com/
>> Fixes: 151f6ff78cdf ("software node: Provide replacement for device_add_properties()")
Hm...the documentation of device_create_managed_software_node() does point out
the limitation that it shouldn't be shared with other devices.
Now, that's rather fragile and the reason I pointed out [1] it should be
changed, but it's technically not a fix?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DM1FMM3KEYU9.1D26IINII93FO@kernel.org/
>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>> Hi!
>>
>> This is my approach at addressing the bug reported by Vivekanandan
>> directly in driver core. Please test it if you can.
>
> This looks good to me, but I think the patch should be simplified somewhat.
>
>> @@ -1190,6 +1191,7 @@ void software_node_notify(struct device *dev)
>> void software_node_notify_remove(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> struct swnode *swnode;
>> + bool is_owner;
>>
>> swnode = dev_to_swnode(dev);
>> if (!swnode)
>> @@ -1206,9 +1208,13 @@ void software_node_notify_remove(struct device *dev)
>> if (!device_match_fwnode(dev, &swnode->fwnode) && swnode->fwnode.dev == dev)
>> swnode->fwnode.dev = NULL;
>>
>> + is_owner = swnode->owner && swnode->owner == dev;
>
> The NULL check here is redundant.
>
>> + if (is_owner)
>> + swnode->owner = NULL;
>
> There is no need to clear the owner field as devices are not allowed to be
> re-registered.
I guess that's true, but maybe leaving in a defined state is a bit more robust?
>> +
>> swnode_put(swnode);
>>
>> - if (swnode->managed) {
>> + if (is_owner) {
>> set_secondary_fwnode(dev, NULL);
>> swnode_put(swnode);
>> }
>
> And if we drop the managed reference before the notify one, we can drop
> the temporary as well and this chunk just becomes:
>
> @@ -1206,12 +1207,12 @@ void software_node_notify_remove(struct device *dev)
> if (!device_match_fwnode(dev, &swnode->fwnode) && swnode->fwnode.dev == dev)
> swnode->fwnode.dev = NULL;
>
> - swnode_put(swnode);
> -
> - if (swnode->managed) {
> + if (swnode->owner == dev) {
> set_secondary_fwnode(dev, NULL);
> swnode_put(swnode);
> }
> +
> + swnode_put(swnode);
> }
>
> The end-result applied for 7.4 (to fix the 7.3 regression) is here:
A previous reply from Balasubramani suggested to adjust the doc-comment of
device_create_managed_software_node(), so I thought Bartosz will send a new
version.
Also, are we sure this is -rc material? I think the original commit wasn't
technically broken and the bug in Xe was fixed otherwise.
Thanks,
Danilo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-09 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-02 15:25 Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-11-04 6:47 ` Vivekanandan, Balasubramani
2026-11-04 8:19 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-11-04 8:26 ` Vivekanandan, Balasubramani
2026-11-04 8:35 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-11-04 8:40 ` Vivekanandan, Balasubramani
2026-11-06 17:47 ` Heikki Krogerus
2026-11-09 13:37 ` Johan Hovold
2026-11-09 14:10 ` Danilo Krummrich [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=DMQQO3DTZE66.1Q2XGGDGN3WUP@kernel.org \
--to=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=balasubramani.vivekanandan@intel.com \
--cc=bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=djrscally@gmail.com \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.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®