On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 09:46:04AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > If we pass a software node to a newly created device using struct > platform_device_info, it will not be removed when the device is > released. This may happen when a module creating the device is removed > or on failure in platform_device_add(). > > When we try to reuse that software node in a subsequent call to > platform_device_register_full(), it will fails with -EBUSY. Add the > missing call to device_remove_software_node() in release path. > > In addition to the above change, make sure that we still function > correctly if a software node is used as the primary firmware node as > well as disallow using two software nodes for platform devices as > device_add_software_node() does not handle this case correctly (in fact > a comment inside it states that only one software node per device is > allowed but it will not bail out if two are used so we need to handle it > here).
... > - if (pdevinfo->swnode && pdevinfo->properties) > + /* > + * Only one software node per device is allowed. Make sure we don't > + * accept or create two. > + */ > + if ((pdevinfo->swnode && pdevinfo->properties) || > + (pdevinfo->swnode && is_software_node(pdevinfo->fwnode)) || > + (pdevinfo->properties && is_software_node(pdevinfo->fwnode))) > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); This makes me think of why we have these many ways of doing things... Perhaps we should kill pdevinfo::properties completely? Second thought is what about actually refusing this on the level of device_add_software_node()? And looking at it, we have that check there, why do we need it here then? Did we miss to check error code from device_add_software_node() somewhere? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
