Hi Markus,
Thanks for the review.
> > The call to of_parse_phandle()/of_find_node_by_name() ... returns a node
> > pointer with refcount incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented
> > after the last usage.
> >
> > This SmPL is also looking for places where there is an of_node_put on
> >
> The call to of_parse_phandle()/of_find_node_by_name() ... returns a node
> pointer with refcount incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented
> after the last usage.
>
> This SmPL is also looking for places where there is an of_node_put on
> some path but not on others.
I suggest to improv
The call to of_parse_phandle()/of_find_node_by_name() ... returns a node
pointer with refcount incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented
after the last usage.
This SmPL is also looking for places where there is an of_node_put on
some path but not on others.
Suggested-by: Julia Lawall
Si
> +/// Find missing of_node_put
> +///
> +// Confidence: Moderate
How much would you like to improve the situation around recurring software
development concerns for such source code analysis approaches?
> +virtual report
> +virtual org
I would interpret the provided SmPL code in the way that i
On Fri, 15 Mar 2019, Wen Yang wrote:
> Looking for places where there is an of_node_put on some paths
> but not on others. This SmPL checks that there is a put of the
> same data elsewhere in the function, so perhaps that will
> alleviate the concern about puts where they are not needed,
> whil
Looking for places where there is an of_node_put on some paths
but not on others. This SmPL checks that there is a put of the
same data elsewhere in the function, so perhaps that will
alleviate the concern about puts where they are not needed,
while still making it possible to find the ones that ar
