diff options
| author | Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com> | 2026-09-03 10:43:25 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> | 2026-09-10 18:05:43 -0700 |
| commit | 27600805e62f800bacf990354632eae4e487d34c (patch) | |
| tree | e8aec0ddfaa0bc264d79af632e3de3f1b75ae4c8 /Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst | |
| download | linux-stable-27600805e62f800bacf990354632eae4e487d34c.tar.gz linux-stable-27600805e62f800bacf990354632eae4e487d34c.zip | |
x86/amd_node: Fix PCI device reference counting in amd_smn_init()grafted
The local "root" pointer is a temporary variable used during the device
search. Therefore, refcount related to the search iterators should be cleaned
up after the search is complete.
Use the __free() cleanup macro to ensure the refcount is decremented when the
temporary pointer goes out of scope.
Additionally, increment the refcount when caching a root pointer. This ensures
the in-use refcount is separate from the temporary search refcounting.
Finally, drop the redundant "root = NULL" before the second search loop. The
pci_get_class() iterator always decrements the refcount of its "from"
argument, so the first loop can only fall through with "root" already NULL.
Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
Closes: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260806160159.230453-1-jason.andryuk%40amd.com
Reported-by: Sashiko <sashiko-bot@kernel.org>
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260903154325.74343-1-yazen.ghannam@amd.com
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst | 72 |
1 files changed, 72 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ecc3ed638 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +====================================== +Devicetree and Open Firmware Subsystem +====================================== + +Other Process Documents +----------------------- + +Please see the documents in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ for information +on how to write proper Devicetree bindings and how to submit patches. + +Patch Review and Handling +------------------------- + +Patches handled by Devicetree maintainers are processed differently depending +on the patch type: + +1. Core OF driver code, e.g. drivers/of/: + patches are reviewed and applied by DT maintainers. + +2. Devicetree bindings: + patches are reviewed by DT maintainers, but should be applied by subsystem + maintainers except in certain cases. See also *For kernel maintainers* in + Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst. + +3. DTS and drivers: + DT maintainers might provide comments, but review is generally not expected. + DTS must pass schema checks (dtbs_check) or at least do not add any + new warnings. + +Patchwork +~~~~~~~~~ + +Devicetree maintainers review patches using Patchwork, so the current status of +a patch can be checked there. For typical driver submissions, Patchwork +receives the entire patch set, but only a few patches are usually Devicetree +bindings that are reviewed by DT maintainers. + +Explanation of Patchwork statuses: + + - **New**: Not yet processed by the automation toolset. + - **Needs ACK**: Waiting for review by DT maintainers. + - **Handled Elsewhere**: Non-DT patch; not being reviewed here. + - **RFC**: Patch was likely ignored because it was an incomplete RFC. + - **Changes Requested**: Patch was reviewed and DT maintainers expect changes. + - **Accepted**: Patch was reviewed and applied by DT maintainers to their tree. + - **Not Applicable**: Patch was reviewed and is likely in good shape, with a + *Reviewed-by* or *Acked-by* tag provided, but DT maintainers expect someone + else to apply it. + +Patch Re-review and Pinging +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +Due to the high volume of email traffic, Devicetree maintainers do not read +every email they receive and instead rely on Patchwork during the review +process. They also often skip patches that have already been reviewed. + +As a result, maintainers might miss: + +1. Questions about already reviewed patches. +2. Pings, for example when a patch has been reviewed by DT maintainers but has + not been picked up by subsystem maintainers. + +Such cases can be addressed by: + +1. Pinging DT maintainers on the IRC channel. +2. Dropping the DT maintainer’s *Acked-by* or *Reviewed-by* tag when sending a new + version of the patch set, together with an explanation in the patch + changelog describing why the tag was removed and what is expected from DT + maintainers. + |
