linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V10 2/8] ACPI: Add new IORT functions to support MSI domain handling

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:   Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:27:11 +0200
From:   Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     marc.zyngier@....com, jason@...edaemon.net, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        helgaas@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org, Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com,
        will.deacon@....com, catalin.marinas@....com,
        hanjun.guo@...aro.org, shijie.huang@....com,
        robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com, mw@...ihalf.com,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, andrea.gallo@...aro.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        al.stone@...aro.org, graeme.gregory@...aro.org,
        ddaney.cavm@...il.com, okaya@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 2/8] ACPI: Add new IORT functions to support MSI
 domain handling

On 06.09.2016 12:20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2016, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * iort_get_device_domain() - Find MSI domain related to a device
>> + * @dev: The device.
>> + * @req_id: Requester ID for the device.
>> + *
>> + * Returns: the MSI domain for this device, NULL otherwise
>> + */
>> +struct irq_domain *iort_get_device_domain(struct device *dev, u32 req_id)
>> +{
>> +	static struct fwnode_handle *handle;
>
> static ??????
>
>> +	int its_id;
>> +
>> +	if (iort_dev_find_its_id(dev, req_id, 0, &its_id))
>> +		return NULL;
>> +
>> +	handle = iort_find_domain_token(its_id);
>
> You reevaluate that on every call.
>

Obviously it is the bug. Thanks for spotting this.

Tomasz