On 11/20/22 19:42, Yang Yingliang wrote:
Thanks for the quick update to v2.
This part of the patch comment should also be removed, because (if I understand
correctly) it does not occur in the existing tree, only if a proposed patch is
applied:
> I got the the following report:
>
> OF: ERROR: memory leak, expected refcount 1 instead of 4,
> of_node_get()/of_node_put() unbalanced - destroy cset entry:
> attach overlay node /i2c/pmic@34/adc
Am I correct? In any case I appreciate the error report which
provides useful context for the underlying problem.
-Frank
>
> In of_fwnode_get_reference_args(), the refcount of of_args.np has
> been incremented in the case of successful return from
> of_parse_phandle_with_args() or of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args().
>
> Decrement the refcount if of_args is not returned to the caller of
> of_fwnode_get_reference_args().
>
> Fixes: 3e3119d3088f ("device property: Introduce fwnode_property_get_reference_args")
> Signed-off-by: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v1 -> v2:
> Update title and commit message that suggested by Frank.
> ---
> drivers/of/property.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> index 967f79b59016..134cfc980b70 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> @@ -993,8 +993,10 @@ of_fwnode_get_reference_args(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> nargs, index, &of_args);
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
> - if (!args)
> + if (!args) {
> + of_node_put(of_args.np);
> return 0;
> + }
>
> args->nargs = of_args.args_count;
> args->fwnode = of_fwnode_handle(of_args.np);
