On 10/05/18 08:07, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxx> >> >> If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in >> the live devicetree for any given node, then the values in the >> overlay must match the values in the live tree. >> >> If the properties are already in the live tree then there is no >> need to create a changeset entry to add them since they must >> have the same value. This reduces the memory used by the >> changeset and eliminates a possible memory leak. This is >> verified by 12 fewer warnings during the devicetree unittest, >> as the possible memory leak warnings about #address-cells and > > and...? #size-cells no longer occur. (Thanks for catching that.) >> >> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/of/overlay.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/of/overlay.c b/drivers/of/overlay.c >> index 29c33a5c533f..e6fb3ffe9d93 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/overlay.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/overlay.c >> @@ -287,7 +287,12 @@ static struct property *dup_and_fixup_symbol_prop( >> * @target may be either in the live devicetree or in a new subtree that >> * is contained in the changeset. >> * >> - * Some special properties are not updated (no error returned). >> + * Some special properties are not added or updated (no error returned): >> + * "name", "phandle", "linux,phandle". >> + * >> + * Properties "#address-cells" and "#size-cells" are not updated if they >> + * are already in the live tree, but if present in the live tree, the values >> + * in the overlay must match the values in the live tree. > > Perhaps this should be generalized to apply to any property? We can't > really deal with property values changing on the fly anyways. That is a bigger discussion. I'd prefer to not hold up this series for that question to be resolved. It will be easy enough to generalize in an add-on patch later. >> * >> * Update of property in symbols node is not allowed. >> * >> @@ -300,6 +305,7 @@ static int add_changeset_property(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs, >> { >> struct property *new_prop = NULL, *prop; >> int ret = 0; >> + bool check_for_non_overlay_node = false; >> >> if (!of_prop_cmp(overlay_prop->name, "name") || >> !of_prop_cmp(overlay_prop->name, "phandle") || >> @@ -322,13 +328,39 @@ static int add_changeset_property(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs, >> if (!new_prop) >> return -ENOMEM; >> >> - if (!prop) >> + if (!prop) { >> + > > Remove the extra blank lines. Will do. > >> + check_for_non_overlay_node = true; >> ret = of_changeset_add_property(&ovcs->cset, target->np, >> new_prop); >> - else >> + >> + } else if (!of_prop_cmp(prop->name, "#address-cells")) { >> + >> + if (prop->length != 4 || new_prop->length != 4 || >> + *(u32 *)prop->value != *(u32 *)new_prop->value) > > Technically these are __be32 types. This could use a helper (of_prop_val_eq). These are in a unpacked form, so cpu byte order, not FDT byte order. > > I'm not sure we really need to validate the length here as dtc does > that (but yes, not everything is from dtc). Since I'm accessing 4 bytes of the values, I need to be sure the lengths are at least 4. For #address-cells and #size-cells the property is specified as four bytes, so I could simplify the code for the specific case. If this gets extended to any arbitrary property then a new of_prop_val_eq() would check that the lengths are equal and the values (of size length) are also equal. > >> + pr_err("ERROR: overlay and/or live tree #address-cells invalid in node %pOF\n", >> + target->np); >> + >> + } else if (!of_prop_cmp(prop->name, "#size-cells")) { >> + >> + if (prop->length != 4 || new_prop->length != 4 || >> + *(u32 *)prop->value != *(u32 *)new_prop->value) >> + pr_err("ERROR: overlay and/or live tree #size-cells invalid in node %pOF\n", >> + target->np); >> + >> + } else { >> + >> + check_for_non_overlay_node = true; >> ret = of_changeset_update_property(&ovcs->cset, target->np, >> new_prop); >> >> + } >> + >> + if (check_for_non_overlay_node && >> + !of_node_check_flag(target->np, OF_OVERLAY)) >> + pr_err("WARNING: %s(), memory leak will occur if overlay removed. Property: %pOF/%s\n", >> + __func__, target->np, new_prop->name); >> + >> if (ret) { >> kfree(new_prop->name); >> kfree(new_prop->value); >> -- >> Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxx> >> >