Messages in this thread | | | From | Guoyong Wang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] random: Fix the issue of '_might_sleep' function running in an atomic contex | Date | Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:12:14 +0800 |
| |
On Web, 20 Mar 2024 02:09:21 +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >> Hi Jason, >> >> Thanks for your suggestions. >> >> I am inclined to accept your second suggestion. My reluctance to accept >> the first is due to the concern that "&& !in_atomic()" could potentially >> alter the original meaning of the 'execute_in_process_context' interface. >> Regarding the third suggestion, modifying the logic associated with 'input' >> is not recommended. > > Doesn't something like the below seem simplest? Just move the call out > of the spinlock and we're done. > > diff --git a/drivers/input/input-core-private.h b/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > index 116834cf8868..717f239e28d0 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > +++ b/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ > struct input_dev; > > void input_mt_release_slots(struct input_dev *dev); > -void input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > +bool input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value); > > #endif /* _INPUT_CORE_PRIVATE_H */ > diff --git a/drivers/input/input.c b/drivers/input/input.c > index f71ea4fb173f..2faf46218c66 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/input.c > +++ b/drivers/input/input.c > @@ -391,20 +391,22 @@ static void input_event_dispose(struct input_dev *dev, int disposition, > } > } > > -void input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > +bool input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value) > { > int disposition; > +bool should_contribute_to_rng = false; > > lockdep_assert_held(&dev->event_lock); > > disposition = input_get_disposition(dev, type, code, &value); > if (disposition != INPUT_IGNORE_EVENT) { > if (type != EV_SYN) > -add_input_randomness(type, code, value); > +should_contribute_to_rng = true; > > input_event_dispose(dev, disposition, type, code, value); > } > +return should_contribute_to_rng; > } > > /** > @@ -428,12 +430,15 @@ void input_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value) > { > unsigned long flags; > +bool should_contribute_to_rng; > > if (is_event_supported(type, dev->evbit, EV_MAX)) { > > spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock, flags); > -input_handle_event(dev, type, code, value); > +should_contribute_to_rng = input_handle_event(dev, type, code, value); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->event_lock, flags); > +if (should_contribute_to_rng) > +add_input_randomness(type, code, value); > } > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(input_event);
Hi Jason,
As I mentioned last time: Your solution may not be applicable when 'input_event' is executed in users spinlock. What are you thoughts on this? I'm looking forward to your suggestions so we can reach an agreement and expedite the upstream process, Thanks!
| |