On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 07:42:17AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > dma_buf_map_attachment and dma_buf_vmap can return NULL or >> > ERR_PTR on a error. This encourages a common buggy pattern in >> > callers: >> > sgt = dma_buf_map_attachment(attach, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL); >> > if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(sgt)) >> > return PTR_ERR(sgt); >> > >> > This causes the caller to return 0 on an error. IS_ERR_OR_NULL >> > is almost always a sign of poorly-defined error handling. >> > >> > This patch converts dma_buf_map_attachment to always return >> > ERR_PTR, and fixes the callers that incorrectly handled NULL. >> > There are a few more callers that were not checking for NULL >> > at all, which would have dereferenced a NULL pointer later. >> > There are also a few more callers that correctly handled NULL >> > and ERR_PTR differently, I left those alone but they could also >> > be modified to delete the NULL check. >> > >> > This patch also converts dma_buf_vmap to always return NULL. >> > All the callers to dma_buf_vmap only check for NULL, and would >> > have dereferenced an ERR_PTR and panic'd if one was ever >> > returned. This is not consistent with the rest of the dma buf >> > APIs, but matches the expectations of all of the callers. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > drivers/base/dma-buf.c | 18 +++++++++++------- >> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c | 2 +- >> > drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c | 2 +- >> > drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-dma-contig.c | 2 +- >> > 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-buf.c b/drivers/base/dma-buf.c >> > index 1e16cbd61da2..cfe1d8bc7bb8 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/base/dma-buf.c >> > +++ b/drivers/base/dma-buf.c >> > @@ -251,9 +251,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_buf_put); >> > * @dmabuf: [in] buffer to attach device to. >> > * @dev: [in] device to be attached. >> > * >> > - * Returns struct dma_buf_attachment * for this attachment; may return negative >> > - * error codes. >> > - * >> > + * Returns struct dma_buf_attachment * for this attachment; returns ERR_PTR on >> > + * error. >> > */ >> > struct dma_buf_attachment *dma_buf_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, >> > struct device *dev) >> > @@ -319,9 +318,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_buf_detach); >> > * @attach: [in] attachment whose scatterlist is to be returned >> > * @direction: [in] direction of DMA transfer >> > * >> > - * Returns sg_table containing the scatterlist to be returned; may return NULL >> > - * or ERR_PTR. >> > - * >> > + * Returns sg_table containing the scatterlist to be returned; returns ERR_PTR >> > + * on error. >> > */ >> > struct sg_table *dma_buf_map_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, >> > enum dma_data_direction direction) >> > @@ -334,6 +332,8 @@ struct sg_table *dma_buf_map_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, >> > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> > >> > sg_table = attach->dmabuf->ops->map_dma_buf(attach, direction); >> > + if (!sg_table) >> > + sg_table = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); >> > >> > return sg_table; >> > } >> > @@ -544,6 +544,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_buf_mmap); >> > * These calls are optional in drivers. The intended use for them >> > * is for mapping objects linear in kernel space for high use objects. >> > * Please attempt to use kmap/kunmap before thinking about these interfaces. >> > + * >> > + * Returns NULL on error. >> > */ >> > void *dma_buf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf) >> > { >> > @@ -566,7 +568,9 @@ void *dma_buf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf) >> > BUG_ON(dmabuf->vmap_ptr); >> > >> > ptr = dmabuf->ops->vmap(dmabuf); >> > - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ptr)) >> > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(ptr))) >> >> since vmap is optional, the WARN_ON might be a bit strong.. although >> it would be a bit strange for an exporter to supply a vmap fxn which >> always returned NULL, not sure about that. Just thought I'd mention >> it in case anyone else had an opinion about that. > > Yeah, I don't like this, it could cause unnecessary reports of problems. The WARN_ON_ONCE is only if the vmap op returns ERR_PTR, not if it returns NULL. This is designed to catch vmap ops that don't follow the spec, so I would call them necessary reports, but I can take it out if you still disagree. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel