Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path()

From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Gaurav Minocha <gaurav.minocha.os@gmail.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Add missing of_node_put() in of_find_node_by_path()
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:35:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdU+sQCxaZsV0KthWkuPrFseqtQZb1j+Emn1CShXh4VdnQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACxGe6sDFQQfiN0+d5HV7JPE-0bosqdaKqrS-7o-obCy1NP_qg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Grant,

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 16:45:56 +0100
>> , Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
>>  wrote:
>>> When traversing all nodes and moving to a new path component, the old
>>> one must be released by calling of_node_put(). Else the refcounts of the
>>> parent node(s) will not be decremented.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
>>> ---
> [...]
>>> Feel free to (ab)use the code below and derive a unittest from it...
>
> BTW, can you do this please? They are pretty important for core
> changes now, and I'm stuck with doing them if the person supplying a
> patch does not (and I'm already too much of a bottleneck on the DT
> code).

I'll see whether I can get to it...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds