kernel-fxtec-pro1x/fs/proc/proc_devtree.c
Steven Rostedt 64a07bd82e [PATCH] protect remove_proc_entry
It has been discovered that the remove_proc_entry has a race in the removing
of entries in the proc file system that are siblings.  There's no protection
around the traversing and removing of elements that belong in the same
subdirectory.

This subdirectory list is protected in other areas by the BKL.  So the BKL was
at first used to protect this area too, but unfortunately, remove_proc_entry
may be called with spinlocks held.  The BKL may schedule, so this was not a
solution.

The final solution was to add a new global spin lock to protect this list,
called proc_subdir_lock.  This lock now protects the list in
remove_proc_entry, and I also went around looking for other areas that this
list is modified and added this protection there too.  Care must be taken
since these locations call several functions that may also schedule.

Since I don't see any location that these functions that modify the
subdirectory list are called by interrupts, the irqsave/restore versions of
the spin lock was _not_ used.

Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-26 08:56:53 -08:00

175 lines
3.9 KiB
C

/*
* proc_devtree.c - handles /proc/device-tree
*
* Copyright 1997 Paul Mackerras
*/
#include <linux/errno.h>
#include <linux/time.h>
#include <linux/proc_fs.h>
#include <linux/stat.h>
#include <linux/string.h>
#include <asm/prom.h>
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_DEVTREE_FIXUPS
static inline void set_node_proc_entry(struct device_node *np,
struct proc_dir_entry *de)
{
}
#endif
static struct proc_dir_entry *proc_device_tree;
/*
* Supply data on a read from /proc/device-tree/node/property.
*/
static int property_read_proc(char *page, char **start, off_t off,
int count, int *eof, void *data)
{
struct property *pp = data;
int n;
if (off >= pp->length) {
*eof = 1;
return 0;
}
n = pp->length - off;
if (n > count)
n = count;
else
*eof = 1;
memcpy(page, pp->value + off, n);
*start = page;
return n;
}
/*
* For a node with a name like "gc@10", we make symlinks called "gc"
* and "@10" to it.
*/
/*
* Add a property to a node
*/
static struct proc_dir_entry *
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *de, struct property *pp)
{
struct proc_dir_entry *ent;
/*
* Unfortunately proc_register puts each new entry
* at the beginning of the list. So we rearrange them.
*/
ent = create_proc_read_entry(pp->name,
strncmp(pp->name, "security-", 9)
? S_IRUGO : S_IRUSR, de,
property_read_proc, pp);
if (ent == NULL)
return NULL;
if (!strncmp(pp->name, "security-", 9))
ent->size = 0; /* don't leak number of password chars */
else
ent->size = pp->length;
return ent;
}
void proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde, struct property *prop)
{
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(pde, prop);
}
void proc_device_tree_remove_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde,
struct property *prop)
{
remove_proc_entry(prop->name, pde);
}
void proc_device_tree_update_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde,
struct property *newprop,
struct property *oldprop)
{
struct proc_dir_entry *ent;
for (ent = pde->subdir; ent != NULL; ent = ent->next)
if (ent->data == oldprop)
break;
if (ent == NULL) {
printk(KERN_WARNING "device-tree: property \"%s\" "
" does not exist\n", oldprop->name);
} else {
ent->data = newprop;
ent->size = newprop->length;
}
}
/*
* Process a node, adding entries for its children and its properties.
*/
void proc_device_tree_add_node(struct device_node *np,
struct proc_dir_entry *de)
{
struct property *pp;
struct proc_dir_entry *ent;
struct device_node *child;
const char *p;
set_node_proc_entry(np, de);
for (child = NULL; (child = of_get_next_child(np, child));) {
p = strrchr(child->full_name, '/');
if (!p)
p = child->full_name;
else
++p;
ent = proc_mkdir(p, de);
if (ent == 0)
break;
proc_device_tree_add_node(child, ent);
}
of_node_put(child);
for (pp = np->properties; pp != 0; pp = pp->next) {
/*
* Yet another Apple device-tree bogosity: on some machines,
* they have properties & nodes with the same name. Those
* properties are quite unimportant for us though, thus we
* simply "skip" them here, but we do have to check.
*/
spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock);
for (ent = de->subdir; ent != NULL; ent = ent->next)
if (!strcmp(ent->name, pp->name))
break;
spin_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
if (ent != NULL) {
printk(KERN_WARNING "device-tree: property \"%s\" name"
" conflicts with node in %s\n", pp->name,
np->full_name);
continue;
}
ent = __proc_device_tree_add_prop(de, pp);
if (ent == 0)
break;
}
}
/*
* Called on initialization to set up the /proc/device-tree subtree
*/
void proc_device_tree_init(void)
{
struct device_node *root;
if ( !have_of )
return;
proc_device_tree = proc_mkdir("device-tree", NULL);
if (proc_device_tree == 0)
return;
root = of_find_node_by_path("/");
if (root == 0) {
printk(KERN_ERR "/proc/device-tree: can't find root\n");
return;
}
proc_device_tree_add_node(root, proc_device_tree);
of_node_put(root);
}