[PATCH v2] tpm: use struct tpm_chip for tpm_chip_find_get()
From: Jason Gunthorpe <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-25 19:46:51
Also in:
keyrings, linux-crypto, linux-integrity, lkml
From: Jason Gunthorpe <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-25 19:46:51
Also in:
keyrings, linux-crypto, linux-integrity, lkml
struct tpm_chip *tpm_chip_find_get(u64 id)
{
struct tpm_chup *chip;
struct tpm_chip *res = NULL;
int chip_num = 0;
int chip_prev;
mutex_lock(&idr_lock);
do {
chip_prev = chip_num;
chip = idr_get_next(&dev_nums_idr, &chip_num);
if (chip && (!id || id == chip->id) && !tpm_try_get_ops(chip)) {
res = chip;
break;
}
} while (chip_prev != chip_num);
mutex_unlock(&idr_lock);
return res;
}
?? The old version was correct, idr_find_slowpath is better than an
idr_get_next serach if you already know id.
PrasannaKumar's solution seems right, if we already have chip, then we
just need to lock it again:
struct tpm_chip *tpm_chip_find_get(struct tpm_chip *chip)
{
struct tpm_chip *res = NULL;
mutex_lock(&idr_lock);
if (!chip) {
int chip_num = 0;
int chip_prev;
do {
chip_prev = chip_num;
chip = idr_get_next(&dev_nums_idr, &chip_num);
if (chip && !tpm_try_get_ops(chip)) {
res = chip;
break;
}
} while (chip_prev != chip_num);
} else {
if (!tpm_try_get_ops(chip))
res = chip;
}
mutex_unlock(&idr_lock);
return res;
}
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html