linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] integrity: TPM internel kernel interface

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, 9 Aug 2008 14:46:22 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>, safford@...son.ibm.com,
	serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, sailer@...son.ibm.com, zohar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] integrity: TPM internel kernel interface

> +{
> +	struct tpm_chip *pos;
> +
> +	spin_lock(&driver_lock);
> +	list_for_each_entry(pos, &tpm_chip_list, list) {
> +		if ((chip_num == TPM_ANY_NUM || pos->dev_num == chip_num)
> +		    && (chip_typ == TPM_ANY_TYPE)) {
> +			spin_unlock(&driver_lock);
> +			return pos;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	spin_unlock(&driver_lock);

besides the usual coding style issues, what protects the chip from going
away afer you dropped the lock?

--
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/