linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] block: export blkdev_reread_part() and __blkdev_reread

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, 8 Apr 2015 23:28:25 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>,
	Stefan Weinhuber <wein@...ibm.com>,
	Stefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@...ibm.com>,
	Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] block: export blkdev_reread_part() and __blkdev_reread_part()

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 10:50:56PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> > +/*
>> > + * This is an exported API for the block driver, and will not
>> > + * acquire bd_mutex, leaving it up to the caller to handle
>> > + * any necessary locking.
>>
>> Actually, the function is introduced and should be used in case
>> that bd_mutex has been held already, such as clearing fd in
>> loop release().
>>
>> > + */
>> > +int __blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
>> >  {
>> >         struct gendisk *disk = bdev->bd_disk;
>> >
>
>         lockdep_assert_held(&bdev->bd_mutex);
>
> is an excellent means of avoiding that comment and verifying its
> actually true :-)

Exactly, and it has been added in my local tree, :-)

>
>> >         if (!disk_part_scan_enabled(disk) || bdev != bdev->bd_contains)
>> >                 return -EINVAL;
>> >         if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
>> >                 return -EACCES;
>> > +
>> > +       return rescan_partitions(disk, bdev);
>> > +}
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__blkdev_reread_part);
>> > +
>> > +/*
>> > + * This is an exported API for the block driver, and will
>> > + * acquire bd_mutex. Make sure you aren't calling it with
>> > + * bd_mutex already held, or we'll return -EBUSY.
>>
>> Strictly speaking, it should be "Make sure you aren't calling it
>> with bd_mutex already held in current context".
>>
>> > + */
>> > +int blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
>> > +{
>> > +       int res;
>> > +
>> >         if (!mutex_trylock(&bdev->bd_mutex))
>> >                 return -EBUSY;
>
> Is that really needed? It seems rather poor form.

The trylock will be replaced with mutex_lock in patch 6.

>
>> > -       res = rescan_partitions(disk, bdev);
>> > +       res = __blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> >         mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
>> > +
>> >         return res;
>> >  }
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(blkdev_reread_part);
--
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/