From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752001Ab1HVMb7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:31:59 -0400 Received: from mgw2.diku.dk ([130.225.96.92]:44584 "EHLO mgw2.diku.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751497Ab1HVMbw (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:31:52 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:31:46 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall To: walter harms Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Grant Likely , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c: add missing of_node_put In-Reply-To: <4E522AD0.7030907@bfs.de> Message-ID: References: <1313943001-12884-2-git-send-email-julia@diku.dk> <4E522AD0.7030907@bfs.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 Aug 2011, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 21.08.2011 18:10, schrieb Julia Lawall: > > From: Julia Lawall > > > > np is initialized to the result of calling a function that calls > > of_node_get, so of_node_put should be called before the pointer is dropped. > > > > The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) > > > > // > > @@ > > expression e,e1,e2; > > @@ > > > > * e = \(of_find_node_by_type\|of_find_node_by_name\)(...) > > ... when != of_node_put(e) > > when != true e == NULL > > when != e2 = e > > e = e1 > > // > > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall > > > > --- > > arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c > > index 96580b1..970ea1d 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/setup.c > > @@ -494,11 +494,15 @@ static int __init pmac_declare_of_platform_devices(void) > > return -1; > > > > np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "valkyrie"); > > - if (np) > > + if (np) { > > of_platform_device_create(np, "valkyrie", NULL); > > + of_node_put(np); > > + } > > np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, "platinum"); > > - if (np) > > + if (np) { > > of_platform_device_create(np, "platinum", NULL); > > + of_node_put(np); > > + } > > np = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, "smu"); > > if (np) { > > of_platform_device_create(np, "smu", NULL); > > > > > hi, > it seems save to call of_node_put(np) with np==NULL, i assume the same is true > for of_platform_device_create(). > > so the code collapses to: > > _test_node(char *name) > { > struct device_node *np; > np = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, name); > of_platform_device_create(np, name, NULL); > of_node_put(np); > return NULL?:0:1; > } > > maybe there is already something like find_node() ? of_platform_device_create is not much used, and one might want to use it with other functions than of_find_node_by_name, as indeed is done here. Is the problem just a missing else between the calls? Is it certain that all of the cases are disjoint? julia