From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754581AbdGJQMh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:12:37 -0400
Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com ([209.85.128.194]:33951 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753882AbdGJQMg (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:12:36 -0400
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 17:12:31 +0100
From: Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>,
        Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
        Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>,
        Chris Brannon <chris@the-brannons.com>, Kirk Reiser <kirk@reisers.ca>,
        speakup@linux-speakup.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] tty: resolve tty contention between kernel and user
 space
Message-ID: <20170710161231.GA417@sanghar>
References: <20170708083803.GA23080@kroah.com>
 <20170709114153.157783481@gmail.com>
 <20170709114426.618570903@gmail.com>
 <CAHp75VdwWNj8PHRAMLqcQKhtT=sS5-n9T3n8GY1Rte=MKOQV-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170710083105.GA719@sanghar>
 <CAHp75VeEjExnouxPqxPg8uVBJXRiWOpLSSypeDMNTheD3aJLNg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VeEjExnouxPqxPg8uVBJXRiWOpLSSypeDMNTheD3aJLNg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 06:21:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 06:04:17PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > +struct tty_struct *tty_kopen(dev_t device)
> >> > +{
> >> > +       struct tty_struct *tty;
> >> > +       struct tty_driver *driver = NULL;
> >> > +       int index = -1;
> >> > +
> >> > +       mutex_lock(&tty_mutex);
> >> > +       driver = tty_lookup_driver(device, NULL, &index);
> >> > +       if (IS_ERR(driver)) {
> >>
> >> > +               mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
> >> > +               return ERR_CAST(driver);
> >>
> >> Hmm... perhaps
> >>
> >> tty = ERR_CAST(driver);
> >> goto out_unlock;
> >>
> >> See below for further details.
> >>
> > Sorry missed this one out. Since tty_lookup_driver has failed, we don't
> > need to down the refcount on driver. So we can return here, without
> > going to out_unlock.
> 
> Yeah, and my point is to use goto with the symmetric giveups of lock
> and reference.
Ah okay I see your point. Sure, I don't mind either way. However, this
code closely follows tty_open_by_driver, so I have tried to keep the
same pattern for sake of consistency :)

Thanks,
Okash