On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:47:08AM -0500, Suman Anna wrote: > Hi Sakari, > > On 03/13/2018 06:14 AM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > Hi Suman, > > > > Thanks for the patch. > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:52:07AM -0500, Suman Anna wrote: > >> The OMAP3 ISP driver manages its MMU mappings through the IOMMU-aware > >> ARM DMA backend. The current code creates a dma_iommu_mapping and > >> attaches this to the ISP device, but never detaches the mapping in > >> either the probe failure paths or the driver remove path resulting > >> in an unbalanced mapping refcount and a memory leak. Fix this properly. > >> > >> Reported-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> > >> Tested-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> > >> --- > >> Hi Mauro, Laurent, > >> > >> This fixes an issue reported by Pavel and discussed on this > >> thread, > >> https://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=152051945803598&w=2 > >> > >> Posting this again to the appropriate lists. > >> > >> regards > >> Suman > >> > >> drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c | 7 +++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c b/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c > >> index 8eb000e3d8fd..c7d667bfc2af 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c > >> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c > >> @@ -1945,6 +1945,7 @@ static int isp_initialize_modules(struct isp_device *isp) > >> > >> static void isp_detach_iommu(struct isp_device *isp) > >> { > >> + arm_iommu_detach_device(isp->dev); > >> arm_iommu_release_mapping(isp->mapping); > >> isp->mapping = NULL; > >> } > >> @@ -1971,13 +1972,15 @@ static int isp_attach_iommu(struct isp_device *isp) > >> ret = arm_iommu_attach_device(isp->dev, mapping); > >> if (ret < 0) { > >> dev_err(isp->dev, "failed to attach device to VA mapping\n"); > >> - goto error; > >> + goto error_attach; > > > > Instead of changing the label here, could you return immediately where the > > previous point of error handling is? No need to add another label. > > Yeah, I debated about this while doing the patch, and chose to retain > the previous common return on the error paths. There are only 2 error > paths, so didn't want to mix them up. If you still prefer the mixed > style, I can post a v2. Yes, please. In general if you only need return a value, a label isn't needed for that even if goto + labels would be otherwise used for error handling. -- Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
