On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Petr Mladek wrote:
> -static int klp_init_patch(struct klp_patch *patch)
> +/* Init operations that must succeed before klp_free_patch() can be called.
> */
> +static int klp_init_patch_before_free(struct klp_patch *patch)
There is no klp_free_patch() now, so the comment is not correct. Also I
don't know if the function name is ideal, but I don't have a better one.
> {
> struct klp_object *obj;
> - int ret;
> + struct klp_func *func;
>
> if (!patch->objs)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - mutex_lock(&klp_mutex);
> -
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&patch->list);
> + patch->kobj_alive = false;
> patch->enabled = false;
> init_completion(&patch->finish);
>
> - ret = kobject_init_and_add(&patch->kobj, &klp_ktype_patch,
> - klp_root_kobj, "%s", patch->mod->name);
> + klp_for_each_object(patch, obj) {
> + if (!obj->funcs)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + obj->kobj_alive = false;
> +
> + klp_for_each_func(obj, func)
> + func->kobj_alive = false;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int klp_init_patch(struct klp_patch *patch)
> +{
> + struct klp_object *obj;
> + int ret;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&klp_mutex);
> +
> + ret = klp_init_patch_before_free(patch);
> if (ret) {
> mutex_unlock(&klp_mutex);
> return ret;
> }
>
> + ret = kobject_init_and_add(&patch->kobj, &klp_ktype_patch,
> + klp_root_kobj, "%s", patch->mod->name);
> + if (ret)
> + goto free;
Is this intentional? It should be sufficient (and it was before the patch) to
unlock the mutex and return ret. We do not need to free anything here. Only
klp_patch instance was initialized and that is all.
Otherwise it looks good. kobj_alive feels safer than state_initialized.
Thanks,
Miroslav
