Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 09:53:37PM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> It's possible, albeit unlikely, that using the of_node here will
> reference freed memory. Call of_node_put() after printing the
> name to be safe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> index 702591f6180a..8af7784a8e35 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> @@ -1340,12 +1340,13 @@ static int armpmu_device_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> if (arch_find_n_match_cpu_physical_id(dn, cpu, NULL))
> break;
>
> - of_node_put(dn);
> if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> pr_warn("Failed to find logical CPU for %s\n",
> dn->name);
> + of_node_put(dn);
> break;
> }
> + of_node_put(dn);
>
> irqs[i] = cpu;
> }
Yeah, I agree this needs changing but given (a) the CPU node isn't going
to disappear and (b) this patch will conflict horribly with my queue for
4.2, do you mind if I sit on this until after the merge window (as a fix
for 4.2)?
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
