lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] ati_remote2.c: possible mutex_lock without mutex_unlock
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> > > From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > input_devices_seq_start() uses mutex_lock_interruptible() to acquire
> > > the input_mutex, but doesn't properly handle the situation when the
> > > call fails (for example due to interrupt). Instead of returning NULL
> > > (which indicates that there is no more data) we should return
> > > ERR_PTR()-encoded error.
> > >
> > > We also need explicit flag indicating whether input_mutex was acquired
> > > since input_devices_seq_stop() is called whether input_devices_seq_start()
> > > was successful or not.
> > >
> > > The same applies to input_handlers_seq_start().
> > >
> > > Reported-by: iceberg <strakh@ispras.ru>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>
> >
> > Yup, looks OK to me.
>
> Putting you as "Reviewed-by.." then, OK?

Sure, feel free to do that.

Thanks,

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-14 09:27    [W:0.033 / U:0.568 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site