lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V3 04/12] misc: xilinx_sdfec: Add open, close and ioctl
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 04:44:57PM +0000, Dragan Cvetic wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org]
> > Sent: Thursday 2 May 2019 18:23
> > To: Dragan Cvetic <draganc@xilinx.com>
> > Cc: arnd@arndb.de; Michal Simek <michals@xilinx.com>; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; robh+dt@kernel.org;
> > mark.rutland@arm.com; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Derek Kiernan <dkiernan@xilinx.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 04/12] misc: xilinx_sdfec: Add open, close and ioctl
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:04:58PM +0100, Dragan Cvetic wrote:
> > > +static int xsdfec_dev_open(struct inode *iptr, struct file *fptr)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xsdfec_dev *xsdfec;
> > > +
> > > + xsdfec = container_of(iptr->i_cdev, struct xsdfec_dev, xsdfec_cdev);
> > > +
> > > + if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&xsdfec->open_count)) {
> >
> > Why do you care about this?
> >
> > And do you really think it matters? What are you trying to protect from
> > here?
>
> There is a request to increase the driver security.

How does this affect "security" in any way?

> It is acceptable for us for now, even with non-perfections (will not
> be protected if opened twice with dup() or fork()). This is covered
> in the documentation.

As this really "does nothing", no need to bother the kernel with trying
to keep this logic working properly. So please just drop it.

thanks,

greg k-h

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-04 11:02    [W:0.083 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site