All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: khali@linux-fr.org (Jean Delvare)
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 2.6.15-rc5] hwmon: add required idr locking
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:32:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060305183227.5deb7c23.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060305152435.GA7990@jupiter.solarsys.private>

Hi Mark,

> Add required locking around idr_ routines, retry the idr_pre_get/idr_get_new
> pair properly, and sprinkle in some likely/unlikely for good measure.
> 
> (Lack of idr locking didn't hurt when all callers were I2C clients, as the
> i2c-core serialized for us anyway.  Now that we have non I2C hwmon drivers,
> this is truly necessary.)
> 
> This patch should be considered for 2.6.16.

Thanks for reporting the problem and proposing a fix. It's all correct
as far as I can tell, but I'd still have a few comments:

> -	if (idr_get_new(&hwmon_idr, NULL, &id) < 0)
> +	spin_lock(&idr_lock);
> +	err = idr_get_new(&hwmon_idr, NULL, &id);
> +	spin_unlock(&idr_lock);
> +
> +	if (unlikely(err = -EAGAIN))
> +		goto again;
> +	else if (unlikely(err))
>  		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

It has just occured to me that the error value we are returning is not
correct. Why -ENOMEM? As far as I know, idr_get_new does not allocate
memory, by design, so it's probably the more inaccurate error value we
could return.

Why don't we just return ERR_PTR(err) instead?

I realize that this isn't strictly related with your patch, the old code
returned just the same, but while we're here changing that code...

> -	if (IS_ERR(cdev))
> +	if (unlikely(IS_ERR(cdev))) {

IS_ERR() already includes an unlikely(), so this is redundant.

And you're right, let's try to get that patch in 2.6.16.

Thanks,
-- 
Jean Delvare


  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-05 17:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-05 15:24 [lm-sensors] [PATCH 2.6.15-rc5] hwmon: add required idr locking Mark M. Hoffman
2006-03-05 17:32 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2006-03-05 21:05 ` Mark M. Hoffman
2006-03-05 21:07 ` Mark M. Hoffman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060305183227.5deb7c23.khali@linux-fr.org \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.