[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160906171008.GA1264@localhost>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 10:10:09 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: ensure ret is initialized to zero before entering
do loop
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 09:03:26PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 05/09/16 15:39, Colin King wrote:
> > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> >
> > A recent fix to iio_buffer_read_first_n_outer removed ret from being set by
> > a return from wait_event_interruptible and also added a continue in a loop
> > which causes the variable ret to not be set when it reaches the end of the
> > loop. Fix this by initializing ret to zero.
> >
> > Also remove extraneous white space at the end of the loop.
> >
> > Fixes: fcf68f3c0bb2a5 ("fix sched WARNING "do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING")
Not that it really matters, but if the commit is still going to be
amended at all, the subject was "iio: fix ...", not just "fix ...".
Definitely not important though.
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> Good find. Strange that got through 0-day without a warning...
>
> Cc'd Brian as author of the fix this is fixing.
> Brian can you sanity check this patch as well.
Indeed, looks fine, and works fine:
Tested-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Thanks for the fix Colin, and sorry for not noticing that error :(
> Applied to the fixes-togreg branch of iio.git and marked for stable.
> Ah well, another one for the statistics on stable patches that introduce bugs while
> fixing other bugs.
>
> Pretty unlikely this will be hit I think, but in theory you never know.
>
> Jonathan
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
> > index 49bf9c5..158aaf4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c
> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ ssize_t iio_buffer_read_first_n_outer(struct file *filp, char __user *buf,
> > DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
> > size_t datum_size;
> > size_t to_wait;
> > - int ret;
> > + int ret = 0;
> >
> > if (!indio_dev->info)
> > return -ENODEV;
> > @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ ssize_t iio_buffer_read_first_n_outer(struct file *filp, char __user *buf,
> > ret = rb->access->read_first_n(rb, n, buf);
> > if (ret == 0 && (filp->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK))
> > ret = -EAGAIN;
> > - } while (ret == 0);
> > + } while (ret == 0);
Personally, I avoided the temptation to fix the whitespace error in a
bugfix patch. But this does scratch my itch :)
Brian
> > remove_wait_queue(&rb->pollq, &wait);
> >
> > return ret;
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists