| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5e640c05.1c69fb81.4dd6f.a3c8@mx.google.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2020 02:32:56 +0530
From: Rohit Sarkar <rohitsarkar5398@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
alexandru.ardelean@...log.com, dragos.bogdan@...log.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] iio: adc: max1363: replace uses of mlock
On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 02:19:46PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 13:34:51 +0530
> Rohit Sarkar <rohitsarkar5398@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Replace usage indio_dev's mlock with either local lock or
> > iio_device_claim_direct_mode.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rohit Sarkar <rohitsarkar5398@...il.com>
>
> There is a subtlety in here (which is why this one never
> got cleaned up before). We need to protect against:
>
> 1) Driver state being accessed from multiple places concurrently.
> That will use your new lock.
> 2) Doing actions that cannot occur if in buffered mode. The
> claim_direct_mode stuff is for that.
I did consider using both, the local driver lock and the claim_direct in
some places, however I noticed that the claim_direct_mode internally uses
the mlock, hence I didnt think it was necessary to set the local lock as
well, as according to my understanding once a process acquires the mlock
no other process can run the critical section before the initial process
releases the mlock. Thus the driver state also remains consistent.
> 3) Prevent us enabling monitor mode when in buffered mode, or
> buffered mode when in monitor mode (because it's really
> fiddly to support both given the odd way this hardware
> works and I never bothered). That requires making sure
> direct mode is claimed before trying to enable the monitor
> mode and also that we don't enable buffered mode. Now interestingly
> there doesn't actually seem to be anything stopping buffered mode
> if monitor mode is on. Probably a bug, but I'd be nervous about
> fixing that without test hardware.
>
> Ignoring that last subtle bit, we sometimes for 1 and 2 need to take
> both locks. We can't be in buffered mode and we need to edit
> local state.
>
> Jonathan
>
> > ---
>
> That's better :) I should have looked at v4 before v3 I guess.
>
Forgot to add the changelog in v3 :) . Should have mentioned that
explicitly, my bad!
> > Changelog v3 -> v4
> > * Fix indentation
> >
> > Changelog v2 -> v3
> > * use iio_device_claim_direct when switching modes
> > * replace mlock usage in max1363_write_event_config
> >
> > Changelog v1 -> v2
> > * Fix indentation
> >
> > drivers/iio/adc/max1363.c | 24 +++++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/max1363.c b/drivers/iio/adc/max1363.c
> > index 5c2cc61b666e..a1550c0b4c0a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/max1363.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/max1363.c
> > @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ struct max1363_chip_info {
> > * @current_mode: the scan mode of this chip
> > * @requestedmask: a valid requested set of channels
> > * @reg: supply regulator
> > + * @lock lock to ensure state is consistent
> > * @monitor_on: whether monitor mode is enabled
> > * @monitor_speed: parameter corresponding to device monitor speed setting
> > * @mask_high: bitmask for enabled high thresholds
> > @@ -169,6 +170,7 @@ struct max1363_state {
> > const struct max1363_mode *current_mode;
> > u32 requestedmask;
> > struct regulator *reg;
> > + struct mutex lock;
> >
> > /* Using monitor modes and buffer at the same time is
> > currently not supported */
> > @@ -364,7 +366,9 @@ static int max1363_read_single_chan(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > struct max1363_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > struct i2c_client *client = st->client;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + ret = iio_device_claim_direct_mode(indio_dev);
>
> So this protects against change of state from polled to buffered mode.
> Great. However, we also use state in here which should be protected
> by the local lock. The solution is to take that local lock as well.
>
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + goto error_ret;
> > /*
> > * If monitor mode is enabled, the method for reading a single
> > * channel will have to be rather different and has not yet
> > @@ -372,7 +376,7 @@ static int max1363_read_single_chan(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > *
> > * Also, cannot read directly if buffered capture enabled.
> > */
> > - if (st->monitor_on || iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
> > + if (st->monitor_on) {
> > ret = -EBUSY;
> > goto error_ret;
> > }
> > @@ -404,8 +408,9 @@ static int max1363_read_single_chan(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > data = rxbuf[0];
> > }
> > *val = data;
> > +
> > error_ret:
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + iio_device_release_direct_mode(indio_dev);
> > return ret;
> >
> > }
> > @@ -705,9 +710,9 @@ static ssize_t max1363_monitor_store_freq(struct device *dev,
> > if (!found)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_lock(&st->lock);
> > st->monitor_speed = i;
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&st->lock);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -810,12 +815,12 @@ static int max1363_read_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > int val;
> > int number = chan->channel;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_lock(&st->lock);
> > if (dir == IIO_EV_DIR_FALLING)
> > val = (1 << number) & st->mask_low;
> > else
> > val = (1 << number) & st->mask_high;
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&st->lock);
> >
> > return val;
> > }
> > @@ -962,7 +967,7 @@ static int max1363_write_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > u16 unifiedmask;
> > int number = chan->channel;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + iio_device_claim_direct_mode(indio_dev);
>
> So the question is whether we are stopping this changing because
> we are in buffered mode or because it's local state...
>
> > unifiedmask = st->mask_low | st->mask_high;
> > if (dir == IIO_EV_DIR_FALLING) {
> >
> > @@ -989,7 +994,7 @@ static int max1363_write_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> >
> > max1363_monitor_mode_update(st, !!(st->mask_high | st->mask_low));
> > error_ret:
> > - mutex_unlock(&indio_dev->mlock);
> > + iio_device_release_direct_mode(indio_dev);
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> > @@ -1587,6 +1592,7 @@ static int max1363_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> >
> > st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> >
> > + mutex_init(&st->lock);
> > st->reg = devm_regulator_get(&client->dev, "vcc");
> > if (IS_ERR(st->reg)) {
> > ret = PTR_ERR(st->reg);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists