Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/18] of: overlay: check prevents multiple fragments
 touching same property
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Alan Tull <atull@kernel.org>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org
References: <1539563070-12969-1-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com>
 <1539563070-12969-14-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com>
 <b6ee53f7e02cc3ea52713ae82402e97d7050cb3e.camel@perches.com>
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <850f0866-1189-5a49-01c5-79caf270abbd@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 14 Oct 2018 18:52:21 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b6ee53f7e02cc3ea52713ae82402e97d7050cb3e.camel@perches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 10/14/18 18:06, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 17:24 -0700, frowand.list@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>
>>
>> Add test case of two fragments updating the same property.  After
>> adding the test case, the system hangs at end of boot, after
>> after slub stack dumps from kfree() in crypto modprobe code.
> []
>> -static int check_changeset_dup_add_node(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs)
>> +static int changeset_dup_entry_check(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs)
>>  {
>> -	struct of_changeset_entry *ce_1, *ce_2;
>> -	char *fn_1, *fn_2;
>> -	int name_match;
>> +	struct of_changeset_entry *ce_1;
>> +	int dup_entry = 0;
>>  
>>  	list_for_each_entry(ce_1, &ovcs->cset.entries, node) {
>> -
>> -		if (ce_1->action == OF_RECONFIG_ATTACH_NODE ||
>> -		    ce_1->action == OF_RECONFIG_DETACH_NODE) {
>> -
>> -			ce_2 = ce_1;
>> -			list_for_each_entry_continue(ce_2, &ovcs->cset.entries, node) {
>> -				if (ce_2->action == OF_RECONFIG_ATTACH_NODE ||
>> -				    ce_2->action == OF_RECONFIG_DETACH_NODE) {
>> -					/* inexpensive name compare */
>> -					if (!of_node_cmp(ce_1->np->full_name,
>> -					    ce_2->np->full_name)) {
>> -						/* expensive full path name compare */
>> -						fn_1 = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%pOF", ce_1->np);
>> -						fn_2 = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%pOF", ce_2->np);
>> -						name_match = !strcmp(fn_1, fn_2);
>> -						kfree(fn_1);
>> -						kfree(fn_2);
>> -						if (name_match) {
>> -							pr_err("ERROR: multiple overlay fragments add and/or delete node %pOF\n",
>> -							       ce_1->np);
>> -							return -EINVAL;
>> -						}
>> -					}
>> -				}
>> -			}
>> -		}
>> +		dup_entry |= find_dup_cset_node_entry(ovcs, ce_1);
>> +		dup_entry |= find_dup_cset_prop(ovcs, ce_1);
> 
> I think this is worse performance than before.
> 
> This now walks all entries when before it would
> return -EINVAL directly when it found a match.

Yes, it is worse performance, but that is OK.

This is a check that is done when a devicetree overlay is applied.
If an error occurs then that means that the overlay was incorrectly
specified.  The file drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_bad_add_dup_prop.dts
in this patch provides an example of how a bad overlay can be created.

Once an error was detected, the check could return immediately, or it
could continue to give a complete list of detected errors.  I chose to
give the complete list of detected errors.

-Frank