> Am 18.04.2016 um 23:22 schrieb Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:55:37PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> commit e7ec014a47e4 ("Input: twl6040-vibra - update for device tree support") >> >> made the separate vibra DT node to a subnode of the twl6040. >> >> It now calls of_find_node_by_name() to locate the "vibra" subnode. >> This function has a side effect to call of_node_put on() for the twl6040 >> parent node passed in as a parameter. This causes trouble later on. >> >> Solution: we must call of_node_get() before of_find_node_by_name() > > God, what messed up API. Yes, indeed. It is opposite to the usual object ownership rule that the code fragment that asks for a handle has to release it. Usually it does not become obvious because often CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC=n. This disables all of_node refcounting completely so such bugs remain unnoticed. > Any chance we can make it a bit more sane and > not drop the reference inside it instead? Well, if you want to change ~2000 files, test on all platforms and ask Linus for agreement? > >> >> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/input/misc/twl6040-vibra.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/twl6040-vibra.c b/drivers/input/misc/twl6040-vibra.c >> index ea63fad..7221a00 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/misc/twl6040-vibra.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/twl6040-vibra.c >> @@ -262,6 +262,7 @@ static int twl6040_vibra_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> int vddvibr_uV = 0; >> int error; >> >> + of_node_get(twl6040_core_dev->of_node); >> twl6040_core_node = of_find_node_by_name(twl6040_core_dev->of_node, >> "vibra"); >> if (!twl6040_core_node) { >> -- >> 2.7.3 >> > > -- > Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html