From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] clk/driver: platform: Fix kfree() of const memory on setting driver_override Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:43:29 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1550484960-2392-1-git-send-email-krzk@kernel.org> <155070010208.77512.17397936280518534534@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Russell King , Mark Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-spi , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Sylwester Nawrocki , Tomasz Figa , Chanwoo Choi , Michael Turquette , Kukjin Kim , Andy Gross , David Brown , Srinivas Kandagatla , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-clk , Linux ARM Return-path: In-Reply-To: <155070010208.77512.17397936280518534534@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 23:01, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Quoting Krzysztof Kozlowski (2019-02-18 03:14:29) > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 11:40, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:27 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > The problem > > > > =========== > > > > Several device types (platform, amba, spi etc.) provide a driver_override > > > > field. On sysfs store or during device removal, they kfree() the > > > > existing value. > > > > > > > > However the users are unaware of this and set the driver_override like: > > > > > > > > pdev->driver_override = "exynos5-subcmu"; > > > > > > > > which obviously leads to error. > > > > > > IMHO driver_override is not meant to be set by a driver, only from userspace, > > > for binding the device to vfio (is there another use case?). > > > > > > > clk: samsung: exynos5: Fix kfree() of const memory on setting > > > > driver_override > > > > slimbus: ngd: Fix kfree() of const memory on setting driver_override > > > > > > I see all users set override immediately after allocating a platform device. > > > Can't they just allocate a platform device using the override name instead? > > > What am I missing? > > > > For the clk-exynos5-subcmu.c case, driver registers several > > sub-devices. Each sub-devices is a clock controller associated with > > power domain. I guess the author wanted to have meaningful names of > > these sub-devices (DISP, CAM etc. like names of power domains), > > instead of just exynos5-subcmu.1, exynos5-subcmu.2 ... > > > > If driver_override should not be used for such case, then I could > > replace it with what you said. > > Looking at the introduction of the code into the platform bus makes it > sound like it was all for vfio devices. If the clk driver doesn't need > it for that purpose and can get by with more generic names then it seems > best to avoid using it entirely. So can you do that and resend the first > patch in this series too? Effectively splitting the clk parts from the > larger issue of kfree()ing of const memory. Sure, let me send just the clk parts. BR, Krzysztof