On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 02:58:39PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hi Greg,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the driver-core tree got a conflict in
>> > drivers/base/firmware_class.c between commit 875979368eb4 ("firmware
>> > loader: fix use-after-free by double abort") from the driver-core.current
>> > tree and commit fe304143b0c3 ("firmware: Avoid deadlock of usermodehelper
>> > lock at shutdown") from the driver-core tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (more may be required - see below) and can carry the fix as
>> > necessary (no action is required).
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > diff --cc drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > index 01e2103,6ede229..0000000
>> > --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> > @@@ -446,22 -452,11 +452,18 @@@ static struct firmware_priv *to_firmwar
>> > return container_of(dev, struct firmware_priv, dev);
>> > }
>> >
>> > - static void fw_load_abort(struct firmware_priv *fw_priv)
>> > + static void fw_load_abort(struct firmware_buf *buf)
>> > {
>> > - struct firmware_buf *buf = fw_priv->buf;
>> > -
>> > + /*
>> > + * There is a small window in which user can write to 'loading'
>> > + * between loading done and disappearance of 'loading'
>> > + */
>> > + if (test_bit(FW_STATUS_DONE, &buf->status))
>> > + return;
>> > +
>> > + list_del_init(&buf->pending_list);
>> > set_bit(FW_STATUS_ABORT, &buf->status);
>> > complete_all(&buf->completion);
>> > -
>> > - /* avoid user action after loading abort */
>> > - fw_priv->buf = NULL;
>>
>> Hmm, maybe the most important part in the commit 875979368eb4
>> ("firmware loader: fix use-after-free by double abort") has been removed, :-)
>>
>> In fact, the commit 87597936 is for linus tree only because it is a fix,
>> so the conflict is caused by merging it with other firmware loader patches
>> in -next tree.
>>
>> Greg, I can figure out one patch for -next easily, but it depends you
>> push it on 3.10-rc or 3.11-rc.
>
> I'll be pushing your patch for 3.10-final to Linus as it fixes a bug,
> but I will need something to resolve the merge issue properly. Can you
> provide me that patch/merge?
OK, I can send you one patch, but I am wondering the patch is against
today's next tree or your driver-core/driver-core-next?
If it is against your driver-core/driver-core-next, would you mind letting
me know how to generate the patch for the conflict? Sorry for the stupid
question, because I seldom meet such problem, :-(
Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
