linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4,2/5] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:24:45 +0530
From:	Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To:	Markus Mayer <markus.mayer@...aro.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	"Omar Ramirez Luna (omar.ramirez@...itl.com)" 
	<omar.ramirez@...itl.com>, Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@...com>,
	LeyFoon Tan <lftan.linux@...il.com>,
	Craig McGeachie <slapdau@...oo.com.au>,
	Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@...ymobile.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Girish K S <ks.giri@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4,2/5] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox

On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Markus Mayer <markus.mayer@...aro.org> wrote:

.....

>> +int mbox_send_message(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *mssg)
>> +{
>> +     int t;
>> +
>> +     if (!chan || !chan->cl)
>> +             return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +     t = _add_to_rbuf(chan, mssg);
>> +     if (t < 0) {
>> +             pr_err("Try increasing MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN\n");
>> +             return t;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     _msg_submit(chan);
>> +
>> +     if (chan->txdone_method == TXDONE_BY_POLL)
>> +             poll_txdone((unsigned long)chan->con);
>
> Wouldn't it be cleaner to use
>                 poll_txdone((unsigned long)&chan->con);
> ?
>
Here's how we use it ...

static void poll_txdone(unsigned long data)
{
     struct mbox_con *con = (struct mbox_con *)data;
     .....
}

To me, unnecessarily passing a pointer to a pointer seems unclean.


>> +int mbox_controller_register(struct mbox_controller *mbox)
>> +{
>> +     int i, num_links, txdone;
>> +     struct mbox_chan *chan;
>> +     struct mbox_con *con;
>> +
>> +     /* Sanity check */
>> +     if (!mbox || !mbox->ops)
>> +             return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +     for (i = 0; mbox->links[i]; i++)
>> +             ;
>> +     if (!i)
>> +             return -EINVAL;
>> +     num_links = i;
>> +
>> +     mutex_lock(&con_mutex);
>> +     /* Check if already populated */
>> +     list_for_each_entry(con, &mbox_cons, node)
>> +             if (!strcmp(mbox->controller_name, con->name)) {
>> +                     mutex_unlock(&con_mutex);
>> +                     return -EINVAL;
>> +             }
>> +
>> +     con = kzalloc(sizeof(struct mbox_con), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +     if (!con)
>> +             return -ENOMEM;
>
> The mutex is not freed here.
>
>> +
>> +     chan = kzalloc(sizeof(struct mbox_chan) * num_links, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +     if (!chan) {
>> +             kfree(con);
>> +             return -ENOMEM;
>
> Again, the mutex is not freed.
>
> You could move both allocations above the mutex. Then you won't have to
> worry about it.
>
Yes thanks. I overlooked. Will fix it.

Regards,
-Jassi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/