netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] cleanup: make scoped

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: <10515bca-782a-47bf-9bcd-eab7fd2fa49e@stanley.mountain>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:31:40 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com,
	Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
	nex.sw.ncis.osdt.itp.upstreaming@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cleanup: make scoped_guard() to be return-friendly

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 03:41:38PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/cleanup.h b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> index d9e613803df1..6b568a8a7f9c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cleanup.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
> @@ -168,9 +168,16 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
>  
>  #define __guard_ptr(_name) class_##_name##_lock_ptr
>  
> -#define scoped_guard(_name, args...)					\
> -	for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args),					\
> -	     *done = NULL; __guard_ptr(_name)(&scope) && !done; done = (void *)1)
> +#define scoped_guard(_name, args...)	\
> +	__scoped_guard_labeled(__UNIQUE_ID(label), _name, args)
> +
> +#define __scoped_guard_labeled(_label, _name, args...)	\
> +	if (0)						\
> +		_label: ;				\
> +	else						\
> +		for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args);		\
> +		     __guard_ptr(_name)(&scope), 1;	\
                                               ^^^
> +		     ({ goto _label; }))
>  

Remove the ", 1".  The point of the __guard_ptr() condition is for try_locks
but the ", 1" means they always succeed.  The only try lock I can find in
the current tree is tsc200x_esd_work().

regards,
dan carpenter