linux-kernel - Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked

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, 8 Jan 2008 21:26:45 +0100
From:	"Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com>
To:	"Matthew Wilcox" <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, gorcunov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl

On Jan 8, 2008 9:21 PM, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 01:16:06PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 09:03:13PM +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
> > > Yes of course, I've been silly in didn't verify whether the file compile
> > > but I would appreciate to know whether I'm on the right track or not.
> >
> > Well ... you're not.
>
> Here's what a correct conversion might look like.  I haven't tried to
> compile it, so I'm copying and pasting it in order to damage whitespace
> and make sure nobody tries to compile it.
>
> index bf1075e..0c543a8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/common/rtctime.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/common/rtctime.c
> @@ -174,8 +174,7 @@ static unsigned int rtc_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *
>         return data != 0 ? POLLIN | POLLRDNORM : 0;
>  }
>
> -static int rtc_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> -                    unsigned long arg)
> +static long rtc_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  {
>         struct rtc_ops *ops = file->private_data;
>         struct rtc_time tm;
> @@ -183,6 +182,8 @@ static int rtc_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
>         void __user *uarg = (void __user *)arg;
>         int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> +       lock_kernel();
> +
>         switch (cmd) {
>         case RTC_ALM_READ:
>                 ret = rtc_arm_read_alarm(ops, &alrm);
> @@ -277,6 +278,9 @@ static int rtc_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
>                         ret = ops->ioctl(cmd, arg);
>                 break;
>         }
> +
> +       unlock_kernel();
> +
>         return ret;
>  }
>
> @@ -334,7 +338,7 @@ static const struct file_operations rtc_fops = {
>         .llseek         = no_llseek,
>         .read           = rtc_read,
>         .poll           = rtc_poll,
> -       .ioctl          = rtc_ioctl,
> +       .unlocked_ioctl = rtc_ioctl,
>         .open           = rtc_open,
>         .release        = rtc_release,
>         .fasync         = rtc_fasync,
>

Thank you Matthew,
I definitely need to back studying before submitting another patch.

Ciao,
-- 
Paolo
http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/
--
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/