Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754349AbdGJPVk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:21:40 -0400
Received: from mail-qk0-f194.google.com ([209.85.220.194]:36761 "EHLO
        mail-qk0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753298AbdGJPVi (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:21:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170710083105.GA719@sanghar>
References: <20170708083803.GA23080@kroah.com> <20170709114153.157783481@gmail.com>
 <20170709114426.618570903@gmail.com> <CAHp75VdwWNj8PHRAMLqcQKhtT=sS5-n9T3n8GY1Rte=MKOQV-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170710083105.GA719@sanghar>
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:21:37 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VeEjExnouxPqxPg8uVBJXRiWOpLSSypeDMNTheD3aJLNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] tty: resolve tty contention between kernel and user space
To: Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>,
        Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
        Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>,
        Chris Brannon <chris@the-brannons.com>, Kirk Reiser <kirk@reisers.ca>,
        speakup@linux-speakup.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1044
Lines: 34

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 06:04:17PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > +struct tty_struct *tty_kopen(dev_t device)
>> > +{
>> > +       struct tty_struct *tty;
>> > +       struct tty_driver *driver = NULL;
>> > +       int index = -1;
>> > +
>> > +       mutex_lock(&tty_mutex);
>> > +       driver = tty_lookup_driver(device, NULL, &index);
>> > +       if (IS_ERR(driver)) {
>>
>> > +               mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
>> > +               return ERR_CAST(driver);
>>
>> Hmm... perhaps
>>
>> tty = ERR_CAST(driver);
>> goto out_unlock;
>>
>> See below for further details.
>>
> Sorry missed this one out. Since tty_lookup_driver has failed, we don't
> need to down the refcount on driver. So we can return here, without
> going to out_unlock.

Yeah, and my point is to use goto with the symmetric giveups of lock
and reference.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko