From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61F54C65C20 for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 15:58:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2C62145D for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 15:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lVVMB6Wn" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DD2C62145D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726799AbeJHXKy (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:10:54 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:46530 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726461AbeJHXKx (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2018 19:10:53 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f41.google.com (mail-ed1-f41.google.com [209.85.208.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 581AC2145D; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 15:58:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1539014308; bh=6bPHYSqqcTTnoh7EbtIq2dGvzt+kn8l1/Vy8N6/2ZE0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=lVVMB6WnhtlOrKU6Uam3oRjjnjKl7hQgp4eJobLHfX0B+2NTyqXrJyLN+ZsGK4TVx mPEnH41p/ng5qwAzBtcskGhhOLcq4Xt55BQkyOK2V+MNc8ejNbbEj7B/lEd/GErRtX /UDiy8+o3rytV/6c6d4lJaukIkFHtGjLXqdHLnGg= Received: by mail-ed1-f41.google.com with SMTP id z21-v6so13637646edb.11; Mon, 08 Oct 2018 08:58:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoi1/Cij/2vkgHV9ibgE15LsWDFioEP3rwjiVGsJ2C8++LFMRb2c o4VbdV1jtLfZKnID11iG8NQXvxa4O97GYojTxGU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV60Ps4cDrZT7OM2ci2vuqoiu+j0y3Fy2Ojhh9Dj1yCwNlNrQxNTxmn3esfrjv6UX735D08iXf2hG0NzFUTY/XL0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7384:: with SMTP id f4-v6mr23743432ejl.8.1539014306619; Mon, 08 Oct 2018 08:58:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1538712767-30394-1-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com> <1538712767-30394-10-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1538712767-30394-10-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com> From: Alan Tull Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 10:57:50 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/16] of: overlay: validate overlay properties #address-cells and #size-cells To: Frank Rowand Cc: Rob Herring , Pantelis Antoniou , Michael Ellerman , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Moritz Fischer , linux-kernel , linuxppc-dev , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote: > > From: Frank Rowand > > If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in > the live devicetree for any given node, then the values in the > overlay must match the values in the live tree. Hi Frank, I'm starting some FPGA testing on this patchset applied to v4.19-rc7. That applied cleanly; if that's not the best base to test against, please let me know. On a very simple overlay, I'm seeing this patch's warning catching things other than #address-cells or #size-cells. I'm just getting started looking at this, will spend time understanding this better and I'll test other overlays. The warnings were: Applying dtbo: socfpga_overlay.dtb [ 33.117881] fpga_manager fpga0: writing soc_system.rbf to Altera SOCFPGA FPGA Manager [ 33.575223] OF: overlay: WARNING: add_changeset_property(), memory leak will occur if overlay removed. Property: /soc/base-fpga-region/firmware-name [ 33.588584] OF: overlay: WARNING: add_changeset_property(), memory leak will occur if overlay removed. Property: /soc/base-fpga-region/fpga-bridges [ 33.601856] OF: overlay: WARNING: add_changeset_property(), memory leak will occur if overlay removed. Property: /soc/base-fpga-region/ranges Here's part of that overlay including the properties it's complaining about: /dts-v1/; /plugin/; / { fragment@0 { target = <&base_fpga_region>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; __overlay__ { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; firmware-name = "soc_system.rbf"; fpga-bridges = <&fpga_bridge1>; ranges = <0x20000 0xff200000 0x100000>, <0x0 0xc0000000 0x20000000>; gpio@10040 { so on... By the way, I didn't get any warnings when I subsequently removed this overlay. Alan > > If the properties are already in the live tree then there is no > need to create a changeset entry to add them since they must > have the same value. This reduces the memory used by the > changeset and eliminates a possible memory leak. This is > verified by 12 fewer warnings during the devicetree unittest, > as the possible memory leak warnings about #address-cells and > > Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand > --- > drivers/of/overlay.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/of/overlay.c b/drivers/of/overlay.c > index 29c33a5c533f..e6fb3ffe9d93 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/overlay.c > +++ b/drivers/of/overlay.c > @@ -287,7 +287,12 @@ static struct property *dup_and_fixup_symbol_prop( > * @target may be either in the live devicetree or in a new subtree that > * is contained in the changeset. > * > - * Some special properties are not updated (no error returned). > + * Some special properties are not added or updated (no error returned): > + * "name", "phandle", "linux,phandle". > + * > + * Properties "#address-cells" and "#size-cells" are not updated if they > + * are already in the live tree, but if present in the live tree, the values > + * in the overlay must match the values in the live tree. > * > * Update of property in symbols node is not allowed. > * > @@ -300,6 +305,7 @@ static int add_changeset_property(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs, > { > struct property *new_prop = NULL, *prop; > int ret = 0; > + bool check_for_non_overlay_node = false; > > if (!of_prop_cmp(overlay_prop->name, "name") || > !of_prop_cmp(overlay_prop->name, "phandle") || > @@ -322,13 +328,39 @@ static int add_changeset_property(struct overlay_changeset *ovcs, > if (!new_prop) > return -ENOMEM; > > - if (!prop) > + if (!prop) { > + > + check_for_non_overlay_node = true; > ret = of_changeset_add_property(&ovcs->cset, target->np, > new_prop); > - else > + > + } else if (!of_prop_cmp(prop->name, "#address-cells")) { > + > + if (prop->length != 4 || new_prop->length != 4 || > + *(u32 *)prop->value != *(u32 *)new_prop->value) > + pr_err("ERROR: overlay and/or live tree #address-cells invalid in node %pOF\n", > + target->np); > + > + } else if (!of_prop_cmp(prop->name, "#size-cells")) { > + > + if (prop->length != 4 || new_prop->length != 4 || > + *(u32 *)prop->value != *(u32 *)new_prop->value) > + pr_err("ERROR: overlay and/or live tree #size-cells invalid in node %pOF\n", > + target->np); > + > + } else { > + > + check_for_non_overlay_node = true; > ret = of_changeset_update_property(&ovcs->cset, target->np, > new_prop); > > + } > + > + if (check_for_non_overlay_node && > + !of_node_check_flag(target->np, OF_OVERLAY)) > + pr_err("WARNING: %s(), memory leak will occur if overlay removed. Property: %pOF/%s\n", > + __func__, target->np, new_prop->name); > + > if (ret) { > kfree(new_prop->name); > kfree(new_prop->value); > -- > Frank Rowand >