From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Chengfeng Ye" <nicoyip.dev@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: Serialize saved termios access with device registration
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 18:52:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260926185231.344DA1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260926184154.3017929-1-nicoyip.dev@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] tty: mixing goto-based error handling with scoped cleanup helpers
--
commit 6bd1bebdb72fb484cd4c55333cfb5b66866fd06e
Author: Chengfeng Ye <nicoyip.dev@gmail.com>
tty: Serialize saved termios access with device registration
tty_register_device_attr() frees saved termios data when reusing a minor
number without serializing with tty_init_termios() or tty_save_termios().
The tty_mutex held by the open and close paths does not protect against
this registration-side free.
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
> index 48569035da56e..26bdc4560a4c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -3242,10 +3247,12 @@ struct device *tty_register_device_attr(struct tty_driver *driver,
> * Free any saved termios data so that the termios state is
> * reset when reusing a minor number.
> */
> - tp = driver->termios[index];
> - if (tp) {
> - driver->termios[index] = NULL;
> - kfree(tp);
> + scoped_guard(mutex, &tty_termios_mutex) {
> + tp = driver->termios[index];
> + if (tp) {
> + driver->termios[index] = NULL;
> + kfree(tp);
> + }
> }
>
> retval = tty_cdev_add(driver, devt, index, 1);
[Severity: Low]
Does this violate the guidelines against mixing goto-based error handling
with scope-based cleanup helpers?
tty_register_device_attr() already uses explicit goto labels for error
cleanup:
err_del:
device_del(dev);
err_put:
put_device(dev);
Mixing these paradigms can create confusing ownership semantics and
increases the risk of resource leaks or double-free bugs during future
refactorings.
Could the function be completely converted to scope-based cleanup first,
or could this patch use traditional locking (mutex_lock/mutex_unlock)
instead?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260926184154.3017929-1-nicoyip.dev@gmail.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-26 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-26 18:41 [PATCH] tty: Serialize saved termios access with device registration Chengfeng Ye
2026-09-26 18:52 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-30 9:20 ` Johan Hovold
2026-09-30 16:27 ` Chengfeng Ye
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=20260926185231.344DA1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicoyip.dev@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox