[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1653104105-16779-1-git-send-email-shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 11:35:05 +0800
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
To: bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
arnaud.pouliquen@...s.st.com
Cc: linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
shengjiu.wang@...il.com
Subject: [RESEND PATCH] rpmsg: char: Add mutex protection for rpmsg_eptdev_open()
There is no mutex protection for rpmsg_eptdev_open(),
especially for eptdev->ept read and write operation.
It may cause issues when multiple instances call
rpmsg_eptdev_open() in parallel,the return state
may be success or EBUGY.
Fixes: 964e8bedd5a1 ("rpmsg: char: Return an error if device already open")
Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
---
changes in resend:
- add fixes tag
drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c
index b6183d4f62a2..4f2189111494 100644
--- a/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c
+++ b/drivers/rpmsg/rpmsg_char.c
@@ -120,8 +120,11 @@ static int rpmsg_eptdev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
struct rpmsg_device *rpdev = eptdev->rpdev;
struct device *dev = &eptdev->dev;
- if (eptdev->ept)
+ mutex_lock(&eptdev->ept_lock);
+ if (eptdev->ept) {
+ mutex_unlock(&eptdev->ept_lock);
return -EBUSY;
+ }
get_device(dev);
@@ -137,11 +140,13 @@ static int rpmsg_eptdev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
if (!ept) {
dev_err(dev, "failed to open %s\n", eptdev->chinfo.name);
put_device(dev);
+ mutex_unlock(&eptdev->ept_lock);
return -EINVAL;
}
eptdev->ept = ept;
filp->private_data = eptdev;
+ mutex_unlock(&eptdev->ept_lock);
return 0;
}
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists