From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com (James Bottomley) Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 16:05:48 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v3 RESEND 2/2] tpm: add support for nonblocking operation In-Reply-To: <153359005823.27531.1050952672299708433.stgit@tstruk-mobl1.jf.intel.com> References: <153358975874.26901.16081444242758666628.stgit@tstruk-mobl1.jf.intel.com> <153359005823.27531.1050952672299708433.stgit@tstruk-mobl1.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: <1533596748.3159.19.camel@HansenPartnership.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 14:14 -0700, Tadeusz Struk wrote: [...] > +static void tpm_async_work(struct work_struct *work) > +{ > + struct file_priv *priv = > + container_of(work, struct file_priv, > async_work); > + ssize_t ret; > + > + ret = tpm_transmit(priv->chip, priv->space, priv- > >data_buffer, > + ???sizeof(priv->data_buffer), 0); Here' you assume the buffer_mutex was taken in write, which is done (see below). However, here, since there was no change to tpm_transmit, you'll sleep in the context of the worker queue waiting for the command to complete and return. > + tpm_put_ops(priv->chip); > + if (ret > 0) { > + priv->data_pending = ret; > + mod_timer(&priv->user_read_timer, jiffies + (120 * > HZ)); > + } > + mutex_unlock(&priv->buffer_mutex); But you don't release buffer_mutex here until the tpm command has completed. > + wake_up_interruptible(&priv->async_wait); > +} > + [...] > @@ -118,25 +155,48 @@ ssize_t tpm_common_write(struct file *file, > const char __user *buf, > ? ?* the char dev is held open. > ? ?*/ > ? if (tpm_try_get_ops(priv->chip)) { > - mutex_unlock(&priv->buffer_mutex); > - return -EPIPE; > + ret = -EPIPE; > + goto out; > ? } > - out_size = tpm_transmit(priv->chip, priv->space, priv- > >data_buffer, > - sizeof(priv->data_buffer), 0); > ? > - tpm_put_ops(priv->chip); > - if (out_size < 0) { > - mutex_unlock(&priv->buffer_mutex); > - return out_size; > + /* > + ?* If in nonblocking mode schedule an async job to send > + ?* the command return the size. > + ?* In case of error the err code will be returned in > + ?* the subsequent read call. > + ?*/ > + if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) { > + queue_work(tpm_dev_wq, &priv->async_work); > + return size; Here you return holding the buffer_mutex, waiting for tpm_async_work to release it. But now I've written my tpm work item and got it queued, I can't write another one without blocking on the buffer_mutex at the top of tpm_common_write(), and since that doesn't get released until the previous command completed, I can only queue one command before I block. For an async interface, shouldn't I be able to queue an arbitrary number of commands without blocking? James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html