linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/11] hwmon: applesmc: Introduce a register lookup table (rev2)

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:	Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:42:35 -0800
From:	Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
To:	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>
CC:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] hwmon: applesmc: Introduce a register lookup
 table (rev2)

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 05:57:24AM -0500, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> mutex_destroy() is defined as a nop, so I guess the question is whether anything
> >> could be holding the lock when entering a second init. There are no sysfs files
> >> created at that point, so I would say no. The mutex could be put back with a
> >> static initializer, if this is not satisfactory. The real reason to move it to
> >> the smcreg struct was to force a rename of the mutex itself.
> >>
> > 
> > Alternatively, you could move the mutex initialization to the beginning
> > of applesmc_init_smcreg() and make it
> > 	mutex_init(&smcreg.mutex);
> 
> 
> Looking at this again, it seems there are two other problems as well. Firstly,
> the cache memory is not freed after probe failure, my apologies. Secondly,
> execution continues after a probe failure, and the initialization is retried. I
> would like to push the latter problem to some other occasion, since the whole
> platform logic should be rewritten for the new interface, anyways.
> 
I see the cache problem; this is indeed a tricky one, since it is actually not yet
a problem after this patch, but will be one after patch 5.

I don't understand the second problem, though. Looking into the code,
the probe function will return an error if applesmc_init_smcreg() fails.
Am I missing something ? What execution continues ?

Thanks,
Guenter
--
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/