Re: [BUG] ati_remote2.c: possible mutex_lock without mutex_unlock

[Jiri Kosina]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> > > From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > input_devices_seq_start() uses mutex_lock_interruptible() to acquire
> > > the input_mutex, but doesn't properly handle the situation when the
> > > call fails (for example due to interrupt). Instead of returning NULL
> > > (which indicates that there is no more data) we should return
> > > ERR_PTR()-encoded error.
> > > 
> > > We also need explicit flag indicating whether input_mutex was acquired
> > > since input_devices_seq_stop() is called whether input_devices_seq_start()
> > > was successful or not.
> > > 
> > > The same applies to input_handlers_seq_start().
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: iceberg <strakh@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Yup, looks OK to me.
> 
> Putting you as "Reviewed-by.." then, OK?

Sure, feel free to do that.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/