On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:02:27 +0800
Amos Kong <ak...@redhat.com> wrote:

> It doesn't save too much cpu time as expected, just a cleanup.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amos Kong <ak...@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/char/hw_random/core.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> index aa30a25..c591d7e 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> @@ -270,8 +270,8 @@ static ssize_t hwrng_attr_current_show(struct device *dev,
>               return -ERESTARTSYS;
>       if (current_rng)
>               name = current_rng->name;
> -     ret = snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%s\n", name);
>       mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
> +     ret = snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%s\n", name);

I'm not sure this is safe.
Name is just a pointer.
What if the hwrng gets unregistered after unlock and just before the snprintf?

>       return ret;
>  }
> @@ -284,19 +284,19 @@ static ssize_t hwrng_attr_available_show(struct device 
> *dev,
>       ssize_t ret = 0;
>       struct hwrng *rng;
>  
> +     buf[0] = '\0';
>       err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rng_mutex);
>       if (err)
>               return -ERESTARTSYS;
> -     buf[0] = '\0';
>       list_for_each_entry(rng, &rng_list, list) {
>               strncat(buf, rng->name, PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
>               ret += strlen(rng->name);
>               strncat(buf, " ", PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
>               ret++;
>       }
> +     mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
>       strncat(buf, "\n", PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
>       ret++;
> -     mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
>  
>       return ret;
>  }

This looks ok.

-- 
Michael

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to