| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 21:30:33 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
Cc: Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@...el.com>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [char-misc-next v3 4/8] watchdog: mei_wdt: add status debugfs
entry
On 12/21/2015 03:17 PM, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> Add entry for dumping current watchdog internal state
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
> ---
> V2: new in the series
> V3: rebase
> drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c
> index 5b28a1e95ac1..ab9aec218d69 100644
> --- a/drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/mei_wdt.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
> #include <linux/watchdog.h>
>
> #include <linux/uuid.h>
> @@ -54,6 +55,24 @@ enum mei_wdt_state {
> MEI_WDT_STOPPING,
> };
>
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
> +static const char *mei_wdt_state_str(enum mei_wdt_state state)
> +{
> + switch (state) {
> + case MEI_WDT_IDLE:
> + return "IDLE";
> + case MEI_WDT_START:
> + return "START";
> + case MEI_WDT_RUNNING:
> + return "RUNNING";
> + case MEI_WDT_STOPPING:
> + return "STOPPING";
> + default:
> + return "unknown";
> + }
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */
> +
I still don't understand why this code has to be here instead of
further below (at <----> mark).
> struct mei_wdt;
>
> /**
> @@ -76,6 +95,8 @@ struct mei_wdt_dev {
> * @cldev: mei watchdog client device
> * @state: watchdog internal state
> * @timeout: watchdog current timeout
> + *
> + * @dbgfs_dir: debugfs dir entry
> */
> struct mei_wdt {
> struct mei_wdt_dev *mwd;
> @@ -83,6 +104,10 @@ struct mei_wdt {
> struct mei_cl_device *cldev;
> enum mei_wdt_state state;
> u16 timeout;
> +
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
> + struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
> +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */
> };
>
> /*
> @@ -387,6 +412,65 @@ static int mei_wdt_register(struct mei_wdt *wdt)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
> +
<---->
> +static ssize_t mei_dbgfs_read_state(struct file *file, char __user *ubuf,
> + size_t cnt, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + struct mei_wdt *wdt = file->private_data;
> + const size_t bufsz = 32;
> + char buf[32];
> + ssize_t pos = 0;
> +
> + pos += scnprintf(buf + pos, bufsz - pos, "state: %s\n",
> + mei_wdt_state_str(wdt->state));
> +
Seems to me that "pos = ..." would accomplish exactly the same
without having to pre-initialize pos. I also don't understand the use of
"+ pos" and "- pos" in the parameter field. pos is 0, isn't it ?
When would it ever be non-0 ?
pos = scnprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "state: %s\n", mei_wdt_state_str(wdt->state));
What am I missing here ?
> + return simple_read_from_buffer(ubuf, cnt, ppos, buf, pos);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct file_operations dbgfs_fops_state = {
> + .open = simple_open,
> + .read = mei_dbgfs_read_state,
> + .llseek = generic_file_llseek,
> +};
> +
> +static void dbgfs_unregister(struct mei_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> + if (!wdt->dbgfs_dir)
> + return;
> + debugfs_remove_recursive(wdt->dbgfs_dir);
debugfs_remove_recursive() checks if the parameter is NULL,
so it is not necessary to check if it is NULL before the call.
> + wdt->dbgfs_dir = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static int dbgfs_register(struct mei_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> + struct dentry *dir, *f;
> +
> + dir = debugfs_create_dir(KBUILD_MODNAME, NULL);
> + if (!dir)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + wdt->dbgfs_dir = dir;
> + f = debugfs_create_file("state", S_IRUSR, dir, wdt, &dbgfs_fops_state);
> + if (!f)
> + goto err;
> +
> + return 0;
> +err:
> + dbgfs_unregister(wdt);
> + return -ENODEV;
The error value is ignored by the caller - why bother returning an error in the first place ?
> +}
> +
> +#else
> +
> +static inline void dbgfs_unregister(struct mei_wdt *wdt) {}
> +
> +static inline int dbgfs_register(struct mei_wdt *wdt)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */
> +
> static int mei_wdt_probe(struct mei_cl_device *cldev,
> const struct mei_cl_device_id *id)
> {
> @@ -414,6 +498,8 @@ static int mei_wdt_probe(struct mei_cl_device *cldev,
> if (ret)
> goto err_disable;
>
> + dbgfs_register(wdt);
> +
> return 0;
>
> err_disable:
> @@ -433,6 +519,8 @@ static int mei_wdt_remove(struct mei_cl_device *cldev)
>
> mei_cldev_disable(cldev);
>
> + dbgfs_unregister(wdt);
> +
> kfree(wdt);
>
> return 0;
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists