Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [net-next, v2, 08/12] dpll: Enhance and consolidate reference counting logic

[Jakub Kicinski]

This is an AI-generated review of your patch.

Dunno if there's a reason for having this fixed by a later patch,
if not let's fix. I'm sending the review mostly because of the
comments on patch 12.

For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
dpll: Enhance and consolidate reference counting logic

This commit refactors DPLL reference counting by introducing centralized
__dpll_{device,pin}_{hold,put}() helpers and updating dpll_xa_ref_*
functions to automatically manage references when adding/removing entries.

> diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> index 156f95de8e8e..f2a77eb1b991 100644

[ ... ]

> @@ -155,6 +194,7 @@ dpll_xa_ref_pin_add(struct xarray *xa_pins, struct 
> dpll_pin *pin,
>       reg->ops = ops;
>       reg->priv = priv;
>       reg->cookie = cookie;
> +     __dpll_pin_hold(pin);
>       if (ref_exists)
>               refcount_inc(&ref->refcount);
>       list_add_tail(&reg->list, &ref->registration_list);

The new __dpll_pin_hold(pin) call is added here for the success path, but
looking at the context above this hunk, there is an early return path when
a duplicate registration is found:

    reg = dpll_pin_registration_find(ref, ops, priv, cookie);
    if (reg) {
        refcount_inc(&ref->refcount);
        return 0;
    }

This early return path increments ref->refcount and returns success, but
does not call __dpll_pin_hold(pin). Meanwhile, dpll_xa_ref_pin_del() always
calls __dpll_pin_put(pin). Could this cause a refcount underflow if a caller
attempts duplicate registration and then later unregistration is attempted?

Note: This appears to be addressed by 934c22045c2a ("dpll: Prevent duplicate
registrations") later in the series, which changes this early return to
return -EEXIST instead of success.

[ ... ]

> @@ -236,6 +277,7 @@ dpll_xa_ref_dpll_add(struct xarray *xa_dplls, struct 
> dpll_device *dpll,
>       reg->ops = ops;
>       reg->priv = priv;
>       reg->cookie = cookie;
> +     __dpll_device_hold(dpll);
>       if (ref_exists)
>               refcount_inc(&ref->refcount);
>       list_add_tail(&reg->list, &ref->registration_list);

The same pattern exists in dpll_xa_ref_dpll_add(): the early return path for
duplicate registrations increments ref->refcount without calling
__dpll_device_hold(dpll), while dpll_xa_ref_dpll_del() always calls
__dpll_device_put(dpll). The same fix in 934c22045c2a addresses this.
-- 
pw-bot: cr