On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 02:58:17PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 05:52:53PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 08:10:35AM +0000, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote: > > > There are independent lifecycle instances (e.g., other drivers) can save > > > a raw pointer to the struct gpio_device (e.g., via gpio_device_find()) > > > or struct gpio_desc (e.g., via gpio_to_desc()). In some operations, > > > they have to access the underlying struct gpio_chip. > > > > > > Leverage revocable for them so that they don't need to handle the > > > synchronization by accessing the SRCU explicitly. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <[email protected]> > > > > > static int gpiod_get_raw_value_commit(const struct gpio_desc *desc) > > > { > > > - struct gpio_device *gdev; > > > struct gpio_chip *gc; > > > int value; > > > + DEFINE_REVOCABLE(rev, desc->gdev->chip_rp); > > > > DEFINE_REVOCABLE() is racy and can lead to use-after-free since nothing > > prevents chip_rp from being revoked and freed while the > > revocable_alloc() hidden in DEFINE_REVOCABLE() is running. > > This was supposed to say "revocable_init()" (i.e. revocable_alloc() > without the memory allocation).
I see the issue. Thanks for identifying this.
