Commit 5c47251
lib/vsprintf: Fix %pfwf when current node refcount == 0
A refcount issue can appeared in __fwnode_link_del() due to the
pr_debug() call:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 901 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0xe5/0x110
Call Trace:
<TASK>
...
of_node_get+0x1e/0x30
of_fwnode_get+0x28/0x40
fwnode_full_name_string+0x34/0x90
fwnode_string+0xdb/0x140
...
vsnprintf+0x17b/0x630
...
__fwnode_link_del+0x25/0xa0
fwnode_links_purge+0x39/0xb0
of_node_release+0xd9/0x180
...
Indeed, an fwnode (of_node) is being destroyed and so, of_node_release()
is called because the of_node refcount reached 0.
From of_node_release() several function calls are done and lead to
a pr_debug() calls with %pfwf to print the fwnode full name.
The issue is not present if we change %pfwf to %pfwP.
To print the full name, %pfwf iterates over the current node and its
parents and obtain/drop a reference to all nodes involved.
In order to allow to print the full name (%pfwf) of a node while it is
being destroyed, do not obtain/drop a reference to this current node.
Fixes: a92eb76 ("lib/vsprintf: Make use of fwnode API to obtain node names and separators")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231114152655.409331-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com1 parent 2a80532 commit 5c47251
1 file changed
Lines changed: 8 additions & 3 deletions
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
2111 | 2111 | | |
2112 | 2112 | | |
2113 | 2113 | | |
2114 | | - | |
2115 | | - | |
| 2114 | + | |
| 2115 | + | |
| 2116 | + | |
| 2117 | + | |
| 2118 | + | |
| 2119 | + | |
2116 | 2120 | | |
2117 | 2121 | | |
2118 | 2122 | | |
2119 | 2123 | | |
2120 | 2124 | | |
2121 | 2125 | | |
2122 | | - | |
| 2126 | + | |
| 2127 | + | |
2123 | 2128 | | |
2124 | 2129 | | |
2125 | 2130 | | |
| |||
0 commit comments