On 26/07/19 4:15 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 01:02:52PM +0530, Nishka Dasgupta wrote:
On 24/07/19 9:17 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:02:31PM +0530, Nishka Dasgupta wrote:
The local variable search in regulator_of_get_init_node takes the value
returned by either of_get_child_by_name or of_node_get, both of which
get a node. If this node is not put before returning, it could cause a
memory leak. Hence put search before a mid-loop return statement.
Issue found with Coccinelle.
- if (!strcmp(desc->of_match, name))
+ if (!strcmp(desc->of_match, name)) {
+ of_node_put(search);
return of_node_get(child);
+ }
Why not just remove the extra of_node_get() and a comment explaining why
it's not needed?
I'm sorry, I don't think I understand. I'm putting search in this patch; the
program was already getting child. Should I also return child directly
instead of getting it again, and continue to put search?
Your new code is dropping a reference then immediately reacquiring one
to return it (introducing a race condition along the way). Why not just
return the already held reference and not call any functions at all?
I still don't understand.
Previously the function was acquiring a reference to child with
of_node_get().
My added code is dropping a reference to search, using of_node_put().
I'm probably misunderstanding this at some point, but I thought search
and child are two different nodes? Or am I completely misunderstanding
what you're explaining?
Apologies for the confusion.
Thanking you,
Nishka
