DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        b=s6ndItEzCm6M620wG+alJkmZM9rw3lFe0cLeMoUi/LyihWrA61AddCMnO7oHhI3Ldw
         5Ma5QqnKyoJCsBSUz2M1jUBCA2Qcz9zZpt6KcmPAsXkUmPmEsniT9k/U8BdxHHffxyDQ
         AEUOgCdQtsaaSA+OJor3bpxUBWcgHMM5HiJxo=
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:49:42 +0200
From: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: mchehab@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix open/close race in saa7134
Message-ID: <20080623184937.GA5593@joi>
References: <20080622100507.779acc59@infradead.org> <20080622172826.GA7487@joi> <20080622105832.1c61fb92@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080622105832.1c61fb92@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1649
Lines: 39

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:58:32AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 19:33:37 +0200
> Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:05:07AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> > > Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:03:02 -0700
> > > Subject: [PATCH] Fix open/close race in saa7134
> > > 
> > > The saa7134 driver uses a (non-atomic) variable in an attempt to
> > > only allow one opener of the device (how it deals with sending
> > > the fd over unix sockets I don't know).
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, the release function first decrements this variable,
> > > and THEN goes on to disable more of the device. This allows for
> > > a race where another opener of the device comes in after the
> > > decrement of the variable, configures the hardware just to then see
> > > the hardware be disabled by the rest of the release function.
> > 
> > Simplier fix:
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/9/308
> > But I don't remember whether it was applied or not...
> 
> 
> the patch might be simpler, but it's not fully correct...
> the decrement is non-atomic and not protected by any lock whatsoever.

It's not atomic, but it don't have to, because there's only one thread which
"owns" the device. But I agree that having a mutex here makes locking more obvious.

PS: Thanks for fixing kerneloops.org.

Marcin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/