From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>,
Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>,
USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Subject: Re: gadgetfs broken since 7f7f25e8
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 21:42:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150303214249.GS29656@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1503031042200.1655-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 10:47:14AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2015, Al Viro wrote:
>
> > Looking at that thing again... why do they need to be dummy? After all,
> > those methods start with get_ready_ep(), which will fail unless we have
> > ->state == STATE_EP_ENABLED. So they'd be failing just fine until that
> > first write() anyway. Let's do the following:
>
> In addition to the changes you made, it looks like you will need the
> following or something similar (also untested). I'm not sure if this
> is race-free, but it's better than before.
Right, ep0 has the same kind of problem...
> @@ -1240,6 +1241,10 @@ static int
> ep0_fasync (int f, struct file *fd, int on)
> {
> struct dev_data *dev = fd->private_data;
> +
> + if (dev->state <= STATE_DEV_OPENED)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
Er... What is protecting dev->state here? Matter of fact, what's the
point of that check at all? Right now you have .fasync = ep0_fasync
both in ep0_io_operations and in dev_init_operations, so your delta
changes the existing semantics...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-03 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-02 8:28 gadgetfs broken since 7f7f25e8 Alexander Holler
2015-03-02 9:13 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-03-02 10:20 ` Al Viro
2015-03-02 11:39 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-02 13:02 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-02 14:31 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-03 8:39 ` Al Viro
2015-03-03 15:47 ` Alan Stern
2015-03-03 21:42 ` Al Viro [this message]
2015-03-04 15:31 ` Alan Stern
2015-03-07 11:23 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-07 20:03 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-07 20:51 ` Al Viro
2015-03-07 20:59 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-07 21:08 ` Alan Stern
2015-03-08 17:38 ` Al Viro
2015-03-08 18:35 ` Alan Stern
2015-03-08 19:20 ` Al Viro
2015-03-10 21:07 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-03-11 10:29 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-11 10:37 ` Alexander Holler
2015-03-03 22:20 ` Al Viro
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=20150303214249.GS29656@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=holler@ahsoftware.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard.weinberger@gmail.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).