From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57EBF35E94E for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791526646; cv=none; b=HjjgTIaU9fEXPTAUTtJnk0hPso0IbS6vwGQTNfOEiKbkwiptvH6gjxqYYh3p5EfU7Wybik7z7OZoLfU6o6fWKzHCc+zB2Qb7EGKPXlZ08qv8YfP/DRMzGNTR+n/Idbb8nQKlEHDJDBuIqh9bGC97AIyZzetIjBNO2SqyDDPwhuw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791526646; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YGmLgGbHPOdas20g1JO1x5PrNHvjdiNDm/ZDrnE38iw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=bgSxftmL9J6yEnvNZ0oM/RSckqDykarmzX+TLFzchDCgVTqknBanVqloYOZtCsOr/176aH4GuPW/tU7YvzfMPYyyrV9XddRNZK/M8g9sv3D0H2wYHSCAWhBXMAn+spaePHQxDDopWgdXOoWOOn21vyQvLerqEQnFbIe4QoNpOlM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=BYqHwDaz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="BYqHwDaz" Received: from pps.filterd (m0353729.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 6993aRmO1404835; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:11 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=wmdKiX BjTMC2CeFgnDjaEhOFFOvsw/zWml+KVBIoTco=; b=BYqHwDaz0xnkmMRR8olgle ncCHaTtVoiub+KHg6nCg/ZMY6mfOSAdjzBumrdwMkmStuj3vKY8bvkTYRRB5G2iv n5SZALSZDNim4ydC6wzjtwNM+n7X5lM9XALITLzDDNysf0p+rd6sqCo7yXjgpX5G zc9mg25JNy6udxHjRrAaMhv8rPa5coMOlxl0pWs7m/IHqgo9R+iNY0JtYm2V23OB 9VeRDzDc3xb45dtUvzTrxhlMMxCNHR4UmP5AwvQzlFba2o2dx4wcEH6hNp4EJz+t nc5aUhDwQ5cKNjKuVwtQz8SIzyDtbiPtJv39TAuK5YEiPwQwbuFoQu6Hir2OUG2g == Received: from ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (db.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.219]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4h5xjw8us4-1 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 09 Oct 2026 06:17:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 6993HmVI290664; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:09 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.226]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4h5a6dtn21-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 09 Oct 2026 06:17:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.101]) by smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 6996H7GB41091354 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:07 GMT Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C386B20040; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA09320043; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.124.216.87] (unknown [9.124.216.87]) by smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:17:05 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 11:47:04 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/pseries: fix device_node leak in drc-info lookup error paths To: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Haotian Zhang Cc: Michael Bringmann , Madhavan Srinivasan , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Nicholas Piggin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman References: <20261009035445.3079660-1-vulab@iscas.ac.cn> <20261009-proud-dog-of-stamina-476677@quoll> Content-Language: en-US From: Shrikanth Hegde In-Reply-To: <20261009-proud-dog-of-stamina-476677@quoll> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Reinject: loops=2 maxloops=12 X-Proofpoint-GUID: b3av1LbhKli-V4JFecKGNkvIQKC-xXol X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYxMDA5MDAyNCBTYWx0ZWRfX4UO2MeIkEIbY 6w0gbhwqcbtC0dr/HmCalplCb1S2nFPHhVqfxlde3OTNhYi11p5eylj4J9ZOMRYr1DV/G0ALBqS 5fOqK/VdF/JE7G8WFEPMLDbREMIT0H3JI4TXNBIcUch1A2ymMucJt80hZtTzlzXCveSoBW0vZLu 4L9lC5Mm/1ZnPKbPD22gZxaJORJkma7htHq3n1KnSBIKGLUKFC43lCxojdYpLAzQqnXuj1LEJOW SdkL7isrVoXxM1DjmnvahsKc4NHpaAdgZcX7bjTyHHsXbrWUU3hnrO4xMARuH4/3fmWIlI9T+Tv 4VwvtwMXpjQyMaoU0xBfUFwbNqSxe8DY/2FYxC1dANdrMF12Z4y9J1tyHzUeQrWIW7MiKnT24YR cyMkxxPE1qQwlLLZRyZbNhFWUtm30NOpIMR/QPUTScOKFGQDqjAgnSRFwqH6yZ1cjg3Rfo+RKwW BPhFnJtzcjgKevcf9Zw== X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=cIt1IVeN c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6ac886e6 cx=c_pps a=aDMHemPKRhS1OARIsFnwRA==:117 a=aDMHemPKRhS1OARIsFnwRA==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=660iZSQnnn4A:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=RnoormkPH1_aCDwRdu11:22 a=uAbxVGIbfxUO_5tXvNgY:22 a=L1tC7fPenBsYHk0p1uUA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info: AW1haW4tMjYxMDA5MDAyNCBTYWx0ZWRfX9+S5+sU8sSDl +llM6kQ3SauIoS4jAEKAYfG/Lu8FxtaAd9ptYEM1s3V0uQ1or2onW+8oMHgmRtKdlGQW1E/w/Cm Q5Wh4KC6lfkgvCt7IzaEv29OUKF4+e4= X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: cZU5Yt2q3RgLQES-ibUbBcuYG8FPQa8Y X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.134,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-10-09_02,2026-10-08_01,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1011 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2610020000 definitions=main-2610090024 On 10/9/26 11:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Fri, 09 Oct 2026 11:54:45 +0800, Haotian Zhang wrote: >> cpu_to_drc_index() and drc_index_to_cpu() acquire the /cpus device_node >> with of_find_node_by_path() and then walk the ibm,drc-info property. When >> an entry whose drc_type is not "CPU" is encountered, the code jumps to the >> err label, which is *after* the err_of_node_put label, so of_node_put() is >> skipped and the reference taken on the /cpus node is leaked on every such >> exit. >> >> Jump to err_of_node_put instead so the device_node reference is always >> released. >> >> Fixes: e83636ac3334 ("pseries/drc-info: Search DRC properties for CPU indexes") >> Assisted-by: DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash >> Signed-off-by: Haotian Zhang >> --- >> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries_energy.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > > > > Multiple things here: > 1. Your team ignored completely previous feedback. > > 2. You use multiple identities with this email, thus I actually doubt we speak > with actual person. > > 3. Finally, same feedback: > You sent multiple independent patches, to multiple independent > subsystems. The amount of these patches clearly suggest this was > AI generated and most likely not tested. > > More importantly, you sent all this work without properly organizing > relevant patches into patchsets. This makes reviewing difficult > and might cause multiple reviewers to address the same issue. > Replying to the entire set is impossible and requires handling each > patch independently, instead of applying or discarding the set. > Maintainers also won't see the bigger picture of your work. Quite > worrying. > > This is on the verge of hostile patch: bomb us with so many > contributions, we won't be able to handle them in efficient manner, > like responding ONCE to ask you to slow down. Considering all this > is untested and LLM generated, I have even more doubts whether this > should be considered for review. Right, this is one of the concern I agree. A lot of these patches are not mentioning how it is tested out. One should at least mention how did they observe it and tested it and fix does test what it meant to fix. > > Please read kernel documentation BEFORE posting more work. It will > explain you how to identify subsystems, how to organize your work per > subsystem (so a patchset grouping multiple patches with a short cover > letter), how to document usage of LLM and how what you should not do > if this was posted in a good faith. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > >