linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio/gyro/bmg160_core: Improve unlocking of a mutex in five functions

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]

Message-ID: <20180318100515.GA13276@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:05:15 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Pravin Shedge <pravin.shedge4linux@...il.com>,
        Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...e-electrons.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio/gyro/bmg160_core: Improve unlocking of a mutex in
 five functions

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 07:54:22PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:15:32 +0100
> SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> 
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:06:49 +0100
> > 
> > * Add jump targets so that a call of the function "mutex_unlock" is stored
> >   only once in these function implementations.
> > 
> > * Replace 19 calls by goto statements.
> > 
> > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> 
> Hi Markus,
> 
> Some of these are good and sensible changes - others break the code.
> Please be careful to fully check all the resulting paths and ensure
> we don't change wether the lock is still held in all exit paths.
> Note a function that isn't lockdep annotated should not be holding
> any locks, that it took, upon exit.

Please note that you are dealing with someone who is on many kernel
maintainer's email-blacklist, including my own.  I've found it's just
not worth the time and energy in responding to these emails, it's a
time-sink you will never find your way out of.

good luck!

greg k-h