[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YYk1xi3eJdMJdjHC@zn.tnic>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 15:35:50 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ayush Sawal <ayush.sawal@...lsio.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Rohit Maheshwari <rohitm@...lsio.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Vinay Kumar Yadav <vinay.yadav@...lsio.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 00/42] notifiers: Return an error when callback is
already registered
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 03:24:39PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I guess I can add another indirection to notifier_chain_register() and
> avoid touching all the call sites.
IOW, something like this below.
This way I won't have to touch all the callsites and the registration
routines would still return a proper value instead of returning 0
unconditionally.
---
diff --git a/kernel/notifier.c b/kernel/notifier.c
index b8251dc0bc0f..04f08b2ef17f 100644
--- a/kernel/notifier.c
+++ b/kernel/notifier.c
@@ -19,14 +19,12 @@ BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(reboot_notifier_list);
* are layered on top of these, with appropriate locking added.
*/
-static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
- struct notifier_block *n)
+static int __notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
+ struct notifier_block *n)
{
while ((*nl) != NULL) {
- if (unlikely((*nl) == n)) {
- WARN(1, "double register detected");
- return 0;
- }
+ if (unlikely((*nl) == n))
+ return -EEXIST;
if (n->priority > (*nl)->priority)
break;
nl = &((*nl)->next);
@@ -36,6 +34,18 @@ static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
return 0;
}
+static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
+ struct notifier_block *n)
+{
+ int ret = __notifier_chain_register(nl, n);
+
+ if (ret == -EEXIST)
+ WARN(1, "double register of notifier callback %ps detected",
+ n->notifier_call);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
static int notifier_chain_unregister(struct notifier_block **nl,
struct notifier_block *n)
{
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists