[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DC933EE.70409@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:47:42 +0200
From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>
To: Jack Stone <jwjstone@...tmail.fm>
CC: linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, lethal@...ux-sh.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Leann Ogasawara <leann.ogasawara@...onical.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2] fbcon -- fix race between open and removal of framebuffers
On 05/05/2011 11:00 PM, Jack Stone wrote:
> On 05/05/2011 18:41, tim.gardner@...onical.com wrote:
>> +static struct fb_info *get_framebuffer_info(int idx)
>> +__acquires(®istered_lock)
>> +__releases(®istered_lock)
>> +{
>> + struct fb_info *fb_info;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(®istered_lock);
>> + fb_info = registered_fb[idx];
>> + fb_info->ref_count++;
>> + spin_unlock(®istered_lock);
>> +
>> + return fb_info;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int
>> fb_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>> __acquires(&info->lock)
>> @@ -1363,13 +1421,17 @@ __releases(&info->lock)
>>
>> if (fbidx>= FB_MAX)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> - info = registered_fb[fbidx];
>> + info = get_framebuffer_info(fbidx);
>> if (!info)
>> request_module("fb%d", fbidx);
>> - info = registered_fb[fbidx];
>> + info = get_framebuffer_info(fbidx);
>> if (!info)
>> return -ENODEV;
>
> If the first get_framebuffer_info succeeds don't you up the ref count
> twice? Shouldn't this be:
>
> info = get_framebuffer_info(fbidx);
> if (!info) {
> request_module("fb%d", fbidx);
> info = get_framebuffer_info(fbidx);
> }
> if (!info)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jack
Good catch. See attached.
rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@...onical.com
View attachment "0001-fbcon-fix-race-between-open-and-removal-of-framebuff.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (9993 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists