From: Bartosz Golaszewski bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org
[ Upstream commit ec8b6f55b98146c41dcf15e8189eb43291e35e89 ]
If we remove a GPIO chip that is also an interrupt controller with users not having freed some interrupts, we'll end up leaking resources as indicated by the following warning:
remove_proc_entry: removing non-empty directory 'irq/30', leaking at least 'gpio'
As there's no way of notifying interrupt users about the irqchip going away and the interrupt subsystem is not plugged into the driver model and so not all cases can be handled by devlinks, we need to make sure to free all interrupts before the complete the removal of the provider.
Reviewed-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com Tested-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240919135104.3583-1-brgl@bgdev.pl Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c index 337971080dfde..206757d155ef9 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ #include <linux/idr.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> #include <linux/irq.h> +#include <linux/irqdesc.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/list.h> #include <linux/lockdep.h> @@ -710,6 +711,45 @@ bool gpiochip_line_is_valid(const struct gpio_chip *gc, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_line_is_valid);
+static void gpiod_free_irqs(struct gpio_desc *desc) +{ + int irq = gpiod_to_irq(desc); + struct irq_desc *irqd = irq_to_desc(irq); + void *cookie; + + for (;;) { + /* + * Make sure the action doesn't go away while we're + * dereferencing it. Retrieve and store the cookie value. + * If the irq is freed after we release the lock, that's + * alright - the underlying maple tree lookup will return NULL + * and nothing will happen in free_irq(). + */ + scoped_guard(mutex, &irqd->request_mutex) { + if (!irq_desc_has_action(irqd)) + return; + + cookie = irqd->action->dev_id; + } + + free_irq(irq, cookie); + } +} + +/* + * The chip is going away but there may be users who had requested interrupts + * on its GPIO lines who have no idea about its removal and have no way of + * being notified about it. We need to free any interrupts still in use here or + * we'll leak memory and resources (like procfs files). + */ +static void gpiochip_free_remaining_irqs(struct gpio_chip *gc) +{ + struct gpio_desc *desc; + + for_each_gpio_desc_with_flag(gc, desc, FLAG_USED_AS_IRQ) + gpiod_free_irqs(desc); +} + static void gpiodev_release(struct device *dev) { struct gpio_device *gdev = to_gpio_device(dev); @@ -1122,6 +1162,7 @@ void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gc) /* FIXME: should the legacy sysfs handling be moved to gpio_device? */ gpiochip_sysfs_unregister(gdev); gpiochip_free_hogs(gc); + gpiochip_free_remaining_irqs(gc);
scoped_guard(mutex, &gpio_devices_lock) list_del_rcu(&gdev->list);