Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Oct 2022 11:43:20 +0300 | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Subject | Re: [RFT PATCH v3 10/10] iio: Don't silently expect attribute types |
| |
On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 11:13:53AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > The iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ext() and the > devm_iio_kfifo_buffer_setup_ext() were changed by > commit 15097c7a1adc ("iio: buffer: wrap all buffer attributes into iio_dev_attr") > to silently expect that all attributes given in buffer_attrs array are > device-attributes. This expectation was not forced by the API - and some > drivers did register attributes created by IIO_CONST_ATTR(). > > When using IIO_CONST_ATTRs the added attribute "wrapping" does not copy > the pointer to stored string constant and when the sysfs file is read the > kernel will access to invalid location. > > Change the function signatures to expect an array of iio_dev_attrs to > avoid similar errors in the future.
...
Wouldn't be better to split this on per driver basis or is it impossible?
> drivers/iio/accel/adxl367.c | 10 +++++----- > drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c | 10 +++++----- > drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel-core.c | 12 ++++++------ > drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c | 12 ++++++------ > drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-buffer-dmaengine.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/iio/buffer/kfifo_buf.c | 2 +- > .../common/cros_ec_sensors/cros_ec_sensors_core.c | 6 +++--- > drivers/iio/common/hid-sensors/hid-sensor-trigger.c | 8 ++++---- > drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c | 11 +++++++---- > include/linux/iio/buffer_impl.h | 2 +- > include/linux/iio/kfifo_buf.h | 3 ++- > include/linux/iio/triggered_buffer.h | 6 +++---
...
> struct iio_dev_opaque *iio_dev_opaque = to_iio_dev_opaque(indio_dev); > struct iio_dev_attr *p;
> + const struct iio_dev_attr *id_attr;
I'm wondering if we may keep this upper, so "longer line goes first" rule would be satisfied.
> struct attribute **attr; > int ret, i, attrn, scan_el_attrcount, buffer_attrcount; > const struct iio_chan_spec *channels;
...
> + for (i = 0, id_attr = buffer->attrs[i]; > + (id_attr = buffer->attrs[i]); i++)
Not sure why we have additional parentheses...
> + attr[ARRAY_SIZE(iio_buffer_attrs) + i] = > + (struct attribute *)&id_attr->dev_attr.attr;
...and explicit casting here. Isn't attr is already of a struct attribute?
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |