On 2022/11/23 8:29, Frank Rowand wrote:
Hi Zeng,
In the future, please do not send a new version of a patch series as a reply
to a previous thread. For people who leave threads collapsed in their email
client (like me), there is a good chance that the new patch version email
will not be noticed.
More below...
Get it. Thanks for your suggestion.
With B. R.,
Zeng Heng
On 11/20/22 21:53, Zeng Heng wrote:
When of_changeset_attach_node() returns fail and tchild is
over of life cycle which is duplicated by __of_node_dup(),
it needs to call of_node_put() to release tchild in
error handle route.
This does not seem correct. I will explain this in the patch v1
thread.
Otherwise, there are some memory leak reported about the node:
unreferenced object 0xffff88810cd1e800 (size 256):
backtrace:
kmalloc_trace
__of_node_dup
add_changeset_node (inlined)
build_changeset_next_level
unreferenced object 0xffff888113721240 (size 16):
backtrace:
__kmalloc_node_track_caller
kstrdup
__of_node_dup
add_changeset_node (inlined)
build_changeset_next_level
unreferenced object 0xffff88810a38d400 (size 128):
backtrace:
kmalloc_trace
__of_prop_dup
add_changeset_property
build_changeset_next_level
Fixes: 0290c4ca2536 ("of: overlay: rename identifiers to more reflect what they do")
You have to dig deeper. The code that introduced the issue is even older:
7518b5890d8a of/overlay: Introduce DT overlay support
-Frank
Signed-off-by: Zeng Heng <zengheng4@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/of/overlay.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/of/overlay.c b/drivers/of/overlay.c
index bd8ff4df723d..a5189a0ec0a3 100644
--- a/drivers/of/overlay.c
+++ b/drivers/of/overlay.c
@@ -436,8 +436,10 @@ static int add_changeset_node(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs,
of_node_set_flag(tchild, OF_OVERLAY);
ret = of_changeset_attach_node(&ovcs->cset, tchild);
- if (ret)
+ if (ret) {
+ of_node_put(tchild);
return ret;
+ }
target_child.np = tchild;
target_child.in_livetree = false;
