After finishing using device node got from of_find_compatible_node(),
of_node_put() needs to be called.
Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
---
Changes since V1:
- correct some of_node_put() place to make sure it is safe to be put.
---
arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c | 3 +++
arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c | 1 +
arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c | 1 +
arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c | 2 ++
arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c | 1 +
5 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
index 8fb68c0..5985731 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
void __iomem *src_base;
u32 sbmr2;
+ of_node_put(np);
np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL,
"fsl,imx6ul-src");
src_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
@@ -152,6 +153,8 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
mxc_set_cpu_type(digprog >> 16 & 0xff);
imx_set_soc_revision(revision);
+
+ of_node_put(np);
}
void __init imx_anatop_init(void)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
index b5b557f..07f1972 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c
@@ -282,4 +282,5 @@ void __init imx_gpc_check_dt(void)
/* map GPC, so that at least CPUidle and WARs keep working */
gpc_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
}
+ of_node_put(np);
}
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c
index 2aa2692..cf4e933 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c
@@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ static void __init ls1021a_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,ls1021a-dcfg");
dcfg_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
+ of_node_put(np);
BUG_ON(!dcfg_base);
paddr = __pa_symbol(secondary_startup);
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c
index 1c0ecad..dd34dff 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c
@@ -655,6 +655,8 @@ void __init imx6_pm_ccm_init(const char *ccm_compat)
if (of_property_read_bool(np, "fsl,pmic-stby-poweroff"))
imx6_pm_stby_poweroff_probe();
+
+ of_node_put(np);
}
void __init imx6q_pm_init(void)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c
index 7b2f738..2e756d8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ void __init imx7ulp_pm_init(void)
np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,imx7ulp-smc1");
smc1_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
+ of_node_put(np);
WARN_ON(!smc1_base);
imx7ulp_set_lpm(ULP_PM_RUN);
--
2.7.4
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:20:54PM +0800, Anson Huang wrote:
> After finishing using device node got from of_find_compatible_node(),
> of_node_put() needs to be called.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes since V1:
> - correct some of_node_put() place to make sure it is safe to be put.
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c | 3 +++
> arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c | 2 ++
> arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> index 8fb68c0..5985731 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
> void __iomem *src_base;
> u32 sbmr2;
>
> + of_node_put(np);
> np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL,
> "fsl,imx6ul-src");
> src_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
> @@ -152,6 +153,8 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
>
> mxc_set_cpu_type(digprog >> 16 & 0xff);
> imx_set_soc_revision(revision);
> +
> + of_node_put(np);
> }
It would be a bit more natural here IMHO to introduce a second struct
device_node * variable for the fsl,imx6ul-src device. Then each
of_node_put would belong to exactly one of_find_compatible_node().
(Now the of_node_put() in line 157 frees the fsl,imx6ul-src on i.MX6ULL
and fsl,imx6q-anatop on the others.)
The other hunks look fine.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Hi, Uwe
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] ARM: imx: Add missing of_node_put()
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:20:54PM +0800, Anson Huang wrote:
> > After finishing using device node got from of_find_compatible_node(),
> > of_node_put() needs to be called.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Changes since V1:
> > - correct some of_node_put() place to make sure it is safe to be put.
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c | 3 +++
> > arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c | 1 +
> > arch/arm/mach-imx/platsmp.c | 1 +
> > arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx6.c | 2 ++
> > arch/arm/mach-imx/pm-imx7ulp.c | 1 +
> > 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> > index 8fb68c0..5985731 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/anatop.c
> > @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
> > void __iomem *src_base;
> > u32 sbmr2;
> >
> > + of_node_put(np);
> > np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL,
> > "fsl,imx6ul-src");
> > src_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
> > @@ -152,6 +153,8 @@ void __init imx_init_revision_from_anatop(void)
> >
> > mxc_set_cpu_type(digprog >> 16 & 0xff);
> > imx_set_soc_revision(revision);
> > +
> > + of_node_put(np);
> > }
>
> It would be a bit more natural here IMHO to introduce a second struct
> device_node * variable for the fsl,imx6ul-src device. Then each of_node_put
> would belong to exactly one of_find_compatible_node().
> (Now the of_node_put() in line 157 frees the fsl,imx6ul-src on i.MX6ULL and
> fsl,imx6q-anatop on the others.)
Make sense, please help review V3.
Thanks,
Anson