linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Ensure we lock all regulators

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:	Tue, 01 Dec 2015 17:45:17 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Ensure we lock all regulators

On Tuesday 01 December 2015 16:40:57 Mark Brown wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index daffff83ced2..f71db02fcb71 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static void regulator_lock_supply(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
>         int i;
>  
>         mutex_lock(&rdev->mutex);
> -       for (i = 1; rdev->supply; rdev = rdev->supply->rdev, i++)
> +       for (i = 1; rdev; rdev = rdev->supply->rdev, i++)
>                 mutex_lock_nested(&rdev->mutex, i);
> 

I think now we have a double lock, the initial mutex_lock() needs to
be removed again.

	Arnd
--
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/