lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Subjectdrivers/char/ppdev -
Date
Hi Sudip,

While looking at atomic_t usages and noticed a few potential
problem the way struct pp_struct: atomic_t irqc field

- There is inconsistencies the lock hold in this driver.

pp_do_mutex is help before pp_do_ioctl() is called.
static int pp_do_ioctl()
....

pp_do_mutex
case PPCLRIRQ:
ret = atomic_read(&pp->irqc);
if (copy_to_user(argp, &ret, sizeof(ret)))
return -EFAULT;
atomic_sub(ret, &pp->irqc);
return 0;

This path seems safe as far as atomic_t overflow is concerned.

However, pp_poll(), pp_irq(), and pp_open() etc. don't hold
lock while pp_do_ioctl() path does.

Something to look into to see if this is safe. I see this
comment for pp_poll() /* No kernel lock held - fine */

Anyway, please take a look and see if this is indeed a problem.

thanks,
-- Shuah

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-02 23:03    [W:0.025 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site