Re: [PATCH v2] pstore/ram: Replace of_node_put with __free() for automatic cleanup

[Kees Cook]

On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 09:49:44PM +0000, Abhinav Jain wrote:
> Add __free(device_node) to the parent_node struct declaration
> Add changes to incorporate the review comments from v1
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abhinav Jain <jain.abhinav177@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> PATCH v1 link:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240415161409.8375-1-jain.abhinav177@xxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Changes since v1:
>  - Moved the variable definition back to the top of the function body

The history and version links should be below the "---" line.

But more importantly, please base your patch on the upstream tree,
rather than on your v1 patch. :) (i.e. squash your v1 and v2 together).

-Kees

> ---
>  fs/pstore/ram.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> index 14f2f4864e48..f8258e4567c3 100644
> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> @@ -644,6 +644,7 @@ static int ramoops_parse_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
>  			    struct ramoops_platform_data *pdata)
>  {
>  	struct device_node *of_node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> +	struct device_node *parent_node __free(device_node) = of_node_parent(of_node);
>  	struct resource *res;
>  	u32 value;
>  	int ret;
> @@ -703,7 +704,6 @@ static int ramoops_parse_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
>  	 * we're not a child of "reserved-memory" and mimicking the
>  	 * expected behavior.
>  	 */
> -	struct device_node *parent_node __free(device_node) = of_node_parent(of_node);
>  	if (!of_node_name_eq(parent_node, "reserved-memory") &&
>  	    !pdata->console_size && !pdata->ftrace_size &&
>  	    !pdata->pmsg_size && !pdata->ecc_info.ecc_size) {
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

-- 
Kees Cook