Re: [PATCH v5] iio: imu: kmx61: Use guard(mutex)() over manual locking

[Maxwell Doose]

On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 6:17 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 May 2026 12:27:27 -0500
> Maxwell Doose <m32285159@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 12:17 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 8 May 2026 08:03:45 -0500
> > > Maxwell Doose <m32285159@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jonathan,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 5:33 PM Maxwell Doose <m32285159@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > @@ -945,29 +942,26 @@ static int kmx61_write_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > > >         if (state && data->ev_enable_state)
> > > > >                 return 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > -       mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> > > > > +       guard(mutex)(&data->lock);
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Correct me if I'm wrong but this looks like a TOCTOU race, was
> > > > reported by sashiko at
> > > > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260507223337.48437-1-m32285159%40gmail.com.
> > > > If this is a confirmed race I'll get a fix out this evening.
> > > Indeed looks like a correct report.
> > >
> > > Take your time though. I'm swamped anyway so will be a while before
> > > I get to any new patches (probably!)
> > >
> >
> > Alrighty sounds good. Dunno if we merge this or not and then send the
> > fix just in case or if I base it off of the original. Former seems
> > preferable.
>
> Given we know about it the fix should go first then this change to guard()
> etc based on top of that.
>

Alrighty then. Will send that then.

best regards,
max

>
> Jonathan
>
> >
> > best regards,
> > max
> >
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > best regards,
> > > > max
> > >
>