linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] mtd: Add support for reading MTD devices via the nvmem API

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2017 13:34:19 +0100
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
To:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Cc:     Alban <albeu@...e.fr>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
        Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@...us.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mtd: Add support for reading MTD devices via the
 nvmem API

On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:23:16 +0000
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org> wrote:


> 
> > +	mutex_lock(&mtd_nvmem_list_lock);
> > +	list_for_each_entry(mtd_nvmem, &mtd_nvmem_list, list) {
> > +		if (mtd_nvmem->mtd == mtd) {
> > +			list_del(&mtd_nvmem->list);
> > +			found = true;
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	mutex_unlock(&mtd_nvmem_list_lock);
> > +
> > +	if (found) {
> > +		if (nvmem_unregister(mtd_nvmem->nvmem))
> > +			dev_err(&mtd->dev,
> > +				"Failed to unregister NVMEM device\n");  
> 
> I will be nice to feedback error to top layer, as it does not make sense 
> to remove providers if there are active consumers using it.
> 
> del_mtd_device(), unregister_mtd_user() have return values, I see no 
> reason why notifiers  should not return errors.
> May be if we should fix the remove() call backs to handle and return errors.

It's more complicated than that. What should you do if one of the
->remove() notifier in the middle of the list is returning an error?
Some of them have already taken the remove notification into account.
Should we call ->add() back on those notifiers? Also, I'm not sure they
are all safe against double ->remove() calls, so if we might be in
trouble when the removal is retried.