[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <478A8131.9050500@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:22:57 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
CC: Paul Gortmaker <p_gortmaker@...oo.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver: ip27-rtc - convert ioctl to unlocked_ioctl
On 01/13/2008 09:32 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> This patch converts ioctl call to unlocked_ioctl form with
> explicit big-kernel-lock. Also it makes a bit of cleanup
> converting miscdevice structure initialization to C99 form.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
> ---
>
> Any comments are welcome.
> This is untested code - i've no such chip on my laptop.
>
> Andi, i think we could use mutex to eliminate BKL, but not sure.
>
>
> drivers/char/ip27-rtc.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/ip27-rtc.c b/drivers/char/ip27-rtc.c
> index 932264a..1d83e16 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/ip27-rtc.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/ip27-rtc.c
> @@ -46,8 +46,8 @@
> #include <asm/sn/sn0/hub.h>
> #include <asm/sn/sn_private.h>
>
> -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);
>
> static int rtc_read_proc(char *page, char **start, off_t off,
> int count, int *eof, void *data);
> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static void get_rtc_time(struct rtc_time *rtc_tm);
> #define RTC_TIMER_ON 0x02 /* missed irq timer active */
>
> static unsigned char rtc_status; /* bitmapped status byte. */
> -static unsigned long rtc_freq; /* Current periodic IRQ rate */
> +static unsigned long rtc_freq; /* Current periodic IRQ rate */
> static struct m48t35_rtc *rtc;
>
> /*
> @@ -75,30 +75,34 @@ static unsigned long epoch = 1970; /* year corresponding to 0x00 */
> static const unsigned char days_in_mo[] =
> {0, 31, 28, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31};
>
> -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_time wtime;
> + int err;
> +
> + lock_kernel();
This routine seems to be re-entrant due to parameters on stack + the spin lock,
hence the lock is not needed here at all.
>
> switch (cmd) {
> case RTC_RD_TIME: /* Read the time/date from RTC */
> - {
> get_rtc_time(&wtime);
> + err = copy_to_user((void *)arg, &wtime, sizeof wtime) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> break;
> - }
> case RTC_SET_TIME: /* Set the RTC */
> {
> struct rtc_time rtc_tm;
> unsigned char mon, day, hrs, min, sec, leap_yr;
> unsigned int yrs;
>
> - if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME))
> - return -EACCES;
> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_TIME)) {
> + err = -EACCES;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
>
> if (copy_from_user(&rtc_tm, (struct rtc_time*)arg,
> - sizeof(struct rtc_time)))
> - return -EFAULT;
> + sizeof(struct rtc_time))) {
> + err = -EFAULT;
> + goto unlock;
> + }
>
> yrs = rtc_tm.tm_year + 1900;
> mon = rtc_tm.tm_mon + 1; /* tm_mon starts at zero */
> @@ -107,25 +111,27 @@ static int rtc_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> min = rtc_tm.tm_min;
> sec = rtc_tm.tm_sec;
>
> + err = -EINVAL;
> +
> if (yrs < 1970)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> leap_yr = ((!(yrs % 4) && (yrs % 100)) || !(yrs % 400));
>
> if ((mon > 12) || (day == 0))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> if (day > (days_in_mo[mon] + ((mon == 2) && leap_yr)))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> if ((hrs >= 24) || (min >= 60) || (sec >= 60))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> if ((yrs -= epoch) > 255) /* They are unsigned */
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> if (yrs > 169)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
>
> if (yrs >= 100)
> yrs -= 100;
> @@ -148,12 +154,18 @@ static int rtc_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> rtc->control &= ~M48T35_RTC_SET;
> spin_unlock_irq(&rtc_lock);
>
> - return 0;
> + err = 0;
> + break;
> }
> default:
> - return -EINVAL;
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> }
> - return copy_to_user((void *)arg, &wtime, sizeof wtime) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> +
> + unlock:
> + unlock_kernel();
> +
> + return err;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -170,8 +182,8 @@ static int rtc_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> spin_unlock_irq(&rtc_lock);
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> -
> rtc_status |= RTC_IS_OPEN;
> +
> spin_unlock_irq(&rtc_lock);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -197,16 +209,15 @@ static int rtc_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>
> static const struct file_operations rtc_fops = {
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> - .ioctl = rtc_ioctl,
> + .unlocked_ioctl = rtc_ioctl,
> .open = rtc_open,
> .release = rtc_release,
> };
>
> -static struct miscdevice rtc_dev=
> -{
> - RTC_MINOR,
> - "rtc",
> - &rtc_fops
> +static struct miscdevice rtc_dev = {
> + .minor = RTC_MINOR,
> + .name = "rtc",
> + .fops = &rtc_fops,
> };
>
> static int __init rtc_init(void)
> @@ -229,16 +240,15 @@ static int __init rtc_init(void)
>
> return 0;
> }
> +module_init(rtc_init);
>
> -static void __exit rtc_exit (void)
> +static void __exit rtc_exit(void)
> {
> /* interrupts and timer disabled at this point by rtc_release */
>
> remove_proc_entry ("rtc", NULL);
> misc_deregister(&rtc_dev);
> }
> -
> -module_init(rtc_init);
> module_exit(rtc_exit);
>
> /*
> @@ -274,14 +284,20 @@ static int rtc_get_status(char *buf)
> }
>
> static int rtc_read_proc(char *page, char **start, off_t off,
> - int count, int *eof, void *data)
> + int count, int *eof, void *data)
> {
> int len = rtc_get_status(page);
> - if (len <= off+count) *eof = 1;
> +
> + if (len <= off + count)
> + *eof = 1;
> +
> *start = page + off;
> len -= off;
> - if (len>count) len = count;
> - if (len<0) len = 0;
> + if (len > count)
> + len = count;
> + if (len < 0)
> + len = 0;
> +
> return len;
> }
Post these cleanup things as a separate patch, please.
regards,
--
Jiri Slaby
Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University
Suse Labs
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists