On 30/04/13 08:43, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The intent is that if we aren't allowed to block because we're in an
> NMI or an emergency then we only take the lock if it is uncontended.
>
> Part of the problem is the test is reversed so we return -EBUSY if we
> acquire the lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Static checker stuff. I haven't tested this.
This looks correct to me. Thanks!
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/vars.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/vars.c
> index 1d80c1c..f34d8fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/vars.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/vars.c
> @@ -622,10 +622,12 @@ int efivar_entry_set_safe(efi_char16_t *name, efi_guid_t vendor, u32 attributes,
> if (!ops->query_variable_store)
> return -ENOSYS;
>
> - if (!block && spin_trylock_irqsave(&__efivars->lock, flags))
> - return -EBUSY;
> - else
> + if (!block) {
> + if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&__efivars->lock, flags))
> + return -EBUSY;
> + } else {
> spin_lock_irqsave(&__efivars->lock, flags);
> + }
>
> status = check_var_size(attributes, size + ucs2_strsize(name, 1024));
> if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
